Horr v. Barker
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, County of San Francisco. This case was before this Court upon a former occasion. (8 Cal. R. 503.) Upon another trial in the District Court, some additional facts were proven. The material facts, as they now appear, were substantially these: In December, 1858, Hussey, Bond & Hale sold to Barker & Paddock 6,649 barrels of flour, then on store with Tilden & Little.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, County of San Francisco. This case was before this Court upon a former occasion. (8 Cal. R. 503.) Upon another trial in the District Court, some additional facts were proven. The material facts, as they now appear, were substantially these: In December, 1858, Hussey, Bond & Hale sold to Barker & Paddock 6,649 barrels of flour, then on store with Tilden & Little. The sale was negotiated through J. R. West, a broker. There was evidence tending to show that it was understood between Hussey, Bond & Hale, Barker & Paddock, and West,…
1Opinion of the Court
1. West was intrusted with the possession of the flour as the factor or agent of Barker & Paddock. He had no power or authority to pledge it, and the pledgee consequently acquired no title or property by virtue of the pledge. Patterson v. Tash, 2 Strange, 1178; McCombie v. Davies, 6 East. 538; Same case, 7 ib., p. 5; Newson v. Thornton, 6 East. 17; D’Aubigny v. Duval, 5 D. & E. 664; Martine v. Coles and others, 1 Manl. & S. 140; Boyson v. Coles, 6 Manl. & S. 14; Barrix v. Corrie, 2 B & Ald. 138; Wilkinson v. King, 2 Camp. 335; Monk v. Whittenbury, 2 B. & Ald 484; (22 E. Com. La. 205) Williams…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Saltus & Saltus v. EverettNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Root v. FrenchNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Gibson v. StevensSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Everett v. SaltusNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Ward v. ShawNew York Supreme Court · 1831
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Pacific Grape Products Co., a Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- City of Los Angeles v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
- Wright v. SolomonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Frontier Milling & Elevator Co. v. Roy White Co-operative Mercantile Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1914
- Smith v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.