Riley v. Loma Vista Ranch Co. (1905) · DecisionDepot

Riley v. Loma Vista Ranch Co.

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Court of Appeal Aug 28, 1905 No. No. 16.Published

Before: Smith

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant corporation was bound by the warehouse receipt issued by its manager, as the corporation had ratified the manager's actions, and the corporation was estopped from denying the quantity of goods stated in the receipt.

Issues

Whether the corporation ratified the warehouse receipt issued by its manager to himself.
Whether a warehouseman is estopped from contradicting the quantity of goods stated in a negotiable warehouse receipt.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Howard had authority to issue receipts to himself, and that this particular receipt was ratified by the company”

“a warehouseman is estopped to deny the actual receipt and possession of the goods “represented by said receipt””

Synopsis

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

SMITH, J.

Appeal from a judgment for the defendants- and from an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.

The defendant corporation is successor of the firm of Bixby & Howard, composed of Jotham Bixby, the defendant.

[489]

Howard, and five others, who (excepting one) subscribed for and continued to be the holders of all the stock of the corporation. Howard was manager of the business of the firm before the incorporation, and continued to be such until about the twenty-third day of January, 1897. This suit was-brought to recover the value of the balance of the hay undelivered, represented by a warehouse receipt, which is as follows :—

“Loma Vista Warehouse.

“No. 172. Howard’s Summit, Los Angeles Co., Cal.

.“7-14, 1896.

“Received in Warehouse at Howard’s Summit, on storage,, the following merchandise for account of W. W. Howard, at the following rates, one dollar per ton for the season, i. e.. July 1-97.

“Not responsible for shrinkage or loss by fire.

"Gangway Lots. Marks. No. of Bales. Weight. Description. Numbers. "2-4-11 D, 1, 2159 474,691 Oat & Barley Hay.. "12-13 J,

“This receipt must be surrendered and storage paid before-delivery of goods will be made. Transfers not complete unless entered in the warehouse books. Storage commences: July 1, 1896. Loma Vista Ranch Co.,

Proprietors,

“Per W. W. Howard, Sec. & Manager.’’

This receipt, it is found, was for the balance of the hay undelivered, represented by a receipt in similar form issued in the year 1895, which had been pledged to the Merchants’ National Bank of Los Angeles as collateral security for the-sum of two thousand dollars; and for which the new certificate was substituted. The latter was assigned for value to the defendant W. L. Riley, December 27, 1897, and by him to the plaintiff. Portions of the hay represented by the receipt, aggregating 1,399 bales, were delivered to the defendant W. L. Riley and indorsed on the receipt; and after this delivery the defendant corporation refused to deliver any more hay upon the ground that all the hay of Howard in their possession had been delivered. The assignment of the plaintiff was after this refusal of the defendant corporation, of which the assignee had notice.

Riley v. Loma Vista Ranch Co.

AI Brief

Synopsis

SMITH, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief