Arrow Garage Co. v. Kikugawa

LANGDON, P. J.

This appeal is by the defendant from a judgment against him for $300 in an action to recover for labor and material used in the repair of defendant’s automobile at the special instance and request of defendant. The contract for the repairs was made with the plaintiff by the son of the defendant and the court has found that the labor and materials were of the actual and reasonable value of $300. The only question presented is as to the agency of the defendant’s son, appellant contending that the facts appearing in the record fail to establish either an actual or ostensible agency or to show a ratification of an unauthorized act.

It appears that defendant’s son, Charles, was entrusted with the entire use, management, operation, and control of the automobile in question; that he was authorized to engage storage for it and to purchase .gasoline and oil, all of which he did at the garage of the plaintiff. For several

[680]

months defendant paid the hills for these items, as contracted for by Charles, without objection. During this period Charles had windshields placed upon the car by the plaintiff and it was understood that they were to he removed without charge if the defendant did not like them. The defendant visited the garage and approved of the windshields and paid the bill for them. Some time before November 11, 1921, plaintiff had called Charles’ attention to the fact that the engine in the automobile required repairing. With reference to this matter Mr. Brown, secretary of the plaintiff company, testified: “On the night of November 10th, the son, Charles Kikugawa, came in with a pronounced knock in his motor, which from the outside matter I analyzed as being the connecting rod bearings, and was instructed by him to repair it. That work would have amounted to about $20. The next morning our mechanic started in on it; removed the crank pan, which was probably an hour and a half’s work, and made an internal examination of the motor and saw that the main bearing system was completely gone. I called up Charles Kikugawa, brought him over, got him on his back under the car, and showed him the condition. I told him that the work would go from $200 up—would probably be between $250 and $300. I advised him he could probably get it cheaper at the Cleveland agency than he could with us and asked him, told him before we would do any more work on the car, for him to ask his father what we should do. About two or three hours afterward he rang up and said: ‘My father says to go ahead. ’ ”