Nichols v. Gage
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Wasco County. In 1878 the respondent let her flock of sheep to the appellant on shares. ' The contract was in writing, and among other things, bound the appellant to market the wool which should be shorn from the flock, at his own expense, and pay over to the respondent one-half of the gross proceeds.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Wasco County. In 1878 the respondent let her flock of sheep to the appellant on shares. ' The contract was in writing, and among other things, bound the appellant to market the wool which should be shorn from the flock, at his own expense, and pay over to the respondent one-half of the gross proceeds. The action was brought on this contract, and the breach assigned was the appellant’s refusal to pay over to respondent hex-share of the proceeds of the alleged sales of the wool, amounting to $835 95. The appellant denied any breach, and averred payment in full of tlie respondent’s…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Watson, J.:
There are only two questions involved in this appeal. 1. Did the act of the appellant, in delivering the wool and receiving an advance upon it equal to a large share of its value, amount to a conversion of the respondent’s property therein? 2. If it did, was respondent entitled to recover anything, on account of such conversion, in this action?
The contract gave the appellant the power to sell the wool; but he was 'to defray all expenses and pay over to respondent one-half of the gross proceeds of all sales he might make, as her share. It seems well settled', that an…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Frost v. PlumbSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1873
- Kennedy v. StrongNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Nash v. MosherNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Gillett v. TreganzaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Dawes v. EdesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- L. B. Menefee Lumber Co. v. MacDonaldOregon Supreme Court · 1927
- Oregon Mill & Grain Co. v. HydeOregon Supreme Court · 1918