Beronio

Beronio v. Everett-Johnson Lumber Co.

Good Law
1921 Cal. App. LEXIS 437·53 Cal. App. 786·200 P. 837
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 9, 1921Civ. No. 3795.California602 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kerrigan, J.

Action for damages for failure on the part of defendant to deliver a carload of lumber. Plaintiff had judgment for $562.50 and defendant appeals. Appellant urges several grounds for reversal. It is first contended that the alleged order of sale was taken by a soliciting agent of defendant subject to confirmation which was never had, and that such agent had no express or implied authority to make the sale. It is also urged that the parties never reached an agreement with respect to the terms of sale. Objection is also made that whatever agreement was entered into was violative of the statute of frauds for the reason that it did not contain the essential terms and conditions of the alleged sale, nor was it signed or delivered or intended to bind defendant.

There is no conflict in the testimony concerning the transaction leading up to the alleged sale. The entire case in this respect rests upon the testimony of plaintiff and the agent of defendant company. It appears therefrom without contradiction that defendant was engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling lumber, its principal place of business being at Portland, Oregon. One E. L. Fifield was employed by the company as…

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.