Bonnett v. Farmers & Growers Shipping Ass'n

Citations

• 105 Kan. 121
• 181 P. 634
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 33

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Title and Ownership — Grain Deposited in Elevator — Sale Distinguished from Bailment. Plaintiff deposited grain in an elevator with the understanding that it was to be indiscriminately mixed in a mass with other grain from which the owner of the elevator had the privilege of shipping. There was nó agreement that the elevator company would keep on hand an amount of wheat of like grade and quantity until plaintiff saw fit to dispose of his wheat, but it was the intention of plaintiff, when the price was satisfactory, to present to the elevator owner his scale ticket and receive the prevailing market price for the wheat. Held, that the transaction constituted a sale, and not a bailment.</p> <p>2. Same — Evidence—Findings. The evidence is considered, and held to sustain the findings of fact.</p> <p>3. Same — Evidence Shows a Sale — Not a Bailment. From the plaintiff’s admissions and other circumstances, it is held to have been a reasonable inference that he understood he was to be paid in cash or grain of an equal amount and quality.</p> <p>4. Actions — Conversion of Wheat — Fraud—Inconsistent Remedies. The transaction being- a sale, and not a bailment, it was the right of the elevator owner to treat the grain as its own and to make any disposition thereof it saw fit, being responsible to the plaintiff for the value; and in an action where plaintiff seeks and recovers damages for conversion against the corporation owning the elevator, he is not entitled to recover against officers of the corporation upon the ground that they permitted it to engage in unlawful grain speculations whereby it became insolvent, because the two remedies are inconsistent.</p>