Fanning v. Coronado Beach Co.
Before: Belcher
Synopsis
Deposit—Cold Storage—Gross Negligence—Evidence.—In an action to-charge an hotelkeeper, who had taken perishable goods on cold storage, as an accommodation to and at the risk of the depositor, for gross negligence in allowing the temperature of the storageroom to rise, whereby the goods were destroyed, the evidence reviewed, and held' insufficient to charge the depositary with liability.
BELCHER, C. The plaintiff brought this action to recover from defendant, a corporation, the sum of eight hundred dollars, the alleged value of one hundred and seventy-one dozen dressed chickens, which had spoiled while in defendant’s cold-storage room at Coronado Beach.
• The plaintiff based his right to recover upon an alleged contract, entered into on or about October 21, 1895, “by the [597]térras of which, defendant agreed .to take said chickens and to securely preserve the same in cold storage until December 25, 1895,” and alleged that on representations made by defendant plaintiff was induced to believe, and did believe, that defendant was engaged in the cold-storage business, and that defendant received said chickens “and upon receipt placed the-same in said cold-storage rooms and undertook to preserve them until December 25th, unless sooner sold,” and that through the. failure of defendant to carry out its said agreement the chickens became wholly unfitted for food, and the plaintiff was thereby damaged in the sum named.
The ánswer denied all the material averments of the complaint, and set up facts, which were found by the court to be true, to the effect that no such contract as that alleged by plaintiff was made between the parties; that the defendant had a cold-storage room for its own use, but was not engaged in the cold-storage business; that at the request of plaintiff he was given permission to place his chickens in the cold-storage room and to let them remain there until the holidays, at his own risk and as an accommodation to him, and he placed them in the room under and hy virtue of an agreement made by him-that they were to be kept therein at his own sole risk, for which storage he was to pay the same compensation as was charged by cold-storage companies in the city of Los Angeles; that the chickens were placed by plaintiff in the cold-storage room at various times between October 22 and November 13, 1895, and before all of them had been placed therein some of them so placed had begun to spoil and plaintiff had "notice of that fact; that the chickens did spoil, but not by reason of the negligence of defendant.
The court below gave judgment for the defendant, from which and from an order denying his motion for a new trial the plaintiff appeals.
It appears that respondent was engaged in conducting a large' hotel, known as “Hotel Coronado,” in connection with which it had an ice factory wherein it manufactured ice for use in the hotel and for sale. It also had chests and a storageroom for the preservation of meats and poultry for its own use. The cold air in the storageroom was conducted through pipes from the iceroom, and
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)