Briggs

Briggs v. Marcus-Lesoine, Inc.

Good Law
1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1161·3 Cal. App. 2d 207·39 P.2d 442
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1934Civ. 9404California1,309 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jones, J.

This is an action for money had and received. Judgment was given for the plaintiff in the trial court and defendant has appealed.

The plaintiff was employed as sales manager for a Mrs. Charest, a manufacturer of a ladies’ hair tint or rinse, which was being sold under the trade name of “Lovalon”. As compensation the plaintiff was paid by Mrs. Charest twenty-five per cent of the amount which she received each month for “Lovalon” sold during the preceding month. Marcus-Lesoine, Inc., the' defendant, was the sole distributor of the product under a contract with the manufacturer, and as such distributor paid the manufacturer an agreed price for all of the product taken and then resold it to various merchandising houses and also direct to the consumer trade. In the beginning no relation, contractual or otherwise, existed between the plaintiff and the defendant in so far as handling the product, is concerned. Owing to some dissatisfaction on the part of the plaintiff as to the manner in which Mrs. Charest was making payment of her commissions, a written authorization was made by the two directing Mareus-Lesoine, Inc., to withhold the twenty-five per cent of the amount due to Mrs.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.