Cram v. Tippery

It is not claimed by the plaintiff that the court's finding that McCoy's authority was limited to the sale of one stack of hay, and that he exceeded his authority when he sold seventy tons of hay to the plaintiff, is not supported by substantial evidence But it is contended that the defendant, by his counter-claim, has sought to enforce the very contract which he attempts to repudiate, and has thereby ratified it, and is consequently liable for its breach.

It appears from the evidence that the hay was grown on a ranch owned by the defendant Tippery. McCoy was Tippery's employe in charge of the…