Lumley v. Corbett

Citations

• 18 Cal. 494
• 1861 Cal. LEXIS 239

Syllabus

<p>Dependant bought ale of B. & Co., who professed to act on their own account. The ale belonged to plaintiff, and was delivered to defendant upon an order for it obtained by B. & Co. from plaintiff. Defendant paid B. & Co. for the ale, and had no knowledge of plaintiff's interest until after the ale was received and paid for: Held, that plaintiff cannot sue defendant for the purchase money; that the fact that the order of delivery came from plaintiff was not. sufficient to give defendant notice of plaintiff's right, and that the transaction comes under the doctrines applicable to agents of an undisclosed principal contracting in their own names, who, when empowered to sell, may receive ' payment.</p> <p>Held, further, that even if B. & Co. had acted expressly as agents, the payment to them would have discharged the debt, because the circumstances would have been sufficient to show their authority to receive it; that it is only in the absence of circumstances justifying it that such authority could not be inferred.</p>