Brooks

Brooks v. Minturn

Good Law
1 Cal. 481
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 15, 1851California1,404 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bennett, J.

By the Court,

The demurrer put in to the complaint was overruled by the court, and the defendant filed his answer. The answer was, as has been heretofore held, a waiver of the demurrer.

Smith & Lewis chartered the ship Ocean to the defendant, to carry a cargo of coal from Panama to San Francisco. The charter-party in the commencement of it purports to be an agreement between “ Messrs. Smith & Lewis, consignees of the “ British brig Ocean” and the defendant, and it is signed by *482 Smith & Lewis as principals, and not as agents. The plaintiffs, being the owners of the ship, bring the action to recover the freight agreed to be paid by the charter-party, and the defendant contends that the owners cannot maintain the action in their own names, inasmuch as the contract was made with Smith & Lewis, and not with the plaintiffs. That Smith & Lewis would be personally liable to the defendant for a breach of the contract, had any occurred, there can be no doubt. The authorities are clear as to that matter. But the question presented here is, whether persons not mentioned in the charter-party can be shown, by extrinsic evidence, to be the principals in the contract, and can be allowed to…

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.