Pinson

Pinson v. Schmalz

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 740·94 Cal. 651·30 P. 3
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 11, 1892No. 13751California387 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vanclief, J.

Action for money had and received for the use of the plaintiff. Judgment for defendant, from which, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial, the plaintiff appeals.

The facts upon which plaintiff’s demand is founded are substantially as follows: —

On July 15, 1888, the plaintiff, then residing at Ocos, Guatemala, shipped to defendant in San Francisco, by steamer, sixty-one sacks of coffee in his own name as shipper, but for account of Messrs. Kunze & Duran, of Guatemala, with whom defendant had dealings, and a previous u iderstanding that they were to ship their cof *652 fee to him. By the same steamer defendant received from plaintiff, who was then unknown to defendant, the following letter: —

“ Mr. William Schmalz, San Francisco.

“ My Dear Sir, — By steamer of the 14th I sent to you sixty-one sacks of coffee, in gold, in accordance with letter of advice and bill of lading, by the agency of this port. The said lot you will please hold to the order of Messrs. Kunze & Duran, of the Rodeo Company. At the same time, I request you to send me by the next steamer the inclosed bill of goods, charging me with the amount, to the above-named gentlemen. Please to send me…

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.