Lewis v. Farmers Grain & Milling Co. (1921) · DecisionDepot

Lewis v. Farmers Grain & Milling Co.

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

California Court of Appeal Apr 12, 1921 No. Civ. No. 3000.Published

Before: Craig

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that under an f.o.b. contract, title and risk of loss do not pass to the buyer until the goods are fully loaded onto the carrier, and since the grain was destroyed before loading was complete, the seller retained the risk of loss.

Issues

Whether title to the grain passed to the buyer at the time the goods were destroyed by fire.
Whether an f.o.b. contract requires the goods to be fully loaded onto the carrier for title to pass to the buyer.

Disposition. modified and affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The necessary implication from this and other similar decisions is that until so placed title remains in the seller and the property is wholly at his risk.”

“In the case at bar there is nothing in the contract or the record outside of it to overcome this presumption.”

Synopsis

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Benjamin W. Shipman, Henry O. Wackerbarth, Jos. A. Adair and Henry E. Carter for Appellant.

CRAIG, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for the sum of $1,326.55 and costs. Defendant admits a principal indebtedness of $569.11. The action is upon an express contract for the purchase of a quantity of grain. On the twenty-eighth day of August, 1914, the plaintiff granted the defendant the following option:

“Los Angeles, Cal. Aug. 28th, 1914.

“In consideration for One (1) Dollar to me in hand paid, I hereby give an option to the Farmers Grain & Milling Co. to buy my crop of Light Seed oats consisting of about 1600 sacks, at a price of $1.25 per hundred pounds, free on board cars at Owensmouth. This option is to be in force until Sept. 6th, 1914, and if not exercised by the Farmers Grain & Milling Co., before noon of that date it shall be null and void.

“Geo. Lewis.”

On the thirty-first day of August the defendant exercised the option by letter and asked confirmation by return mail. Instead of writing, plaintiff went to the office of the defendant and confirmed the exercise of the option verbally. Thereafter the plaintiff ordered a car from the Southern Pacific Railway Company at Owensmouth for the purpose of loading it with the oats. The railway company’s agent spotted the car and the plaintiff placed therein 541 or 542 sacks of oats as contracted. While the ear was not completely loaded it,

[213]

together with the oats, burned. No bill of lading had been issued by the railroad company and no notice had been given to the agent of the railroad company that the car was ready for shipment.

The defendant insists that at the time the oats were burned they still remained the property of Lewis. Both sides agree that the risk of loss followed title. Upon this appeal it is necessary to determine who owned the oats at the time they were destroyed. The answer to this question involves a construction of the contract composed of the option agreement and the letter exercising the option with the view to determining whether this entire contract thus constituted was executory or executed.

[1]

Lewis v. Farmers Grain & Milling Co.

AI Brief

Synopsis

CRAIG, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief