Perkins v. Eckert

Citations

• 55 Cal. 400

Syllabus

<p>Contract—Agreement—Instructions.—In an action upon an account, the question was whether a bill of sale of a quantity of wheat, executed by the defendant to the plaintiffs, was an absolute sale in satisfaction of the debt, or was only by way of security; and the Court instructed the jury to the effect, that the bill of sale purporting to be an absolute sale, they should find it to be such, unless it appeared from a preponderance of evidence that it was given as security, and that both parties so understood it. Held, that the last clause of the instruction was erroneous.</p> <p>Instruction.—An instruction is erroneous if there is no evidence tending to establish the hypothesis upon which it is based.</p> <p>Delivery —Chattel Mortgage—Loss oe Mortgaged Property—Instruction.—By the terms of a chattel mortgage of wheat, the mortgagor was to harvest the same, and to deliver it into possession of the mortgagees; and, the question being as to who should bear the loss of a portion of the wheat, alleged to have been shipped by railroad to the place of destination agreed upon, but which did not arrive, the Court instructed the jury to the effect, that if the wheat referred to was shipped in the name of the plaintiffs, and the bills of sale taken in their name with their knowledge and consent, then they were in the possession and the owners thereof, and were liable for any loss resulting from their own negligence or carelessness, or that of their agents and employes. Held, that the proposition was not law, and that the instruction was erroneous.</p>