Pope v. J. K. Armsby Co.

Citations

• 111 Cal. 159
• 43 P. 589
• 1896 Cal. LEXIS 560

Syllabus

<p>Sales—Purchase of Fruit—Agency for Corporation—Ratification— Estoppel.—Where fruit was purchased in the name of an incorporated 0 company'by one assuming to act as its agent, and who signed a contract therefor in its name, and the vendor addressed a letter to the company in reference to the purchase, requesting to know if the purchaser was their agent and if the contract was correct, and was informed by the managing agent that the purchase was made on their advice, but they •were not aware that it was made in their name, but that they would haudle the fruit, and that the writer would visit the vendor’s section in a week or two, and arrange the matter satisfactorily with him then, and such managing agent did within a few days thereafter visit the neighborhood where the vendor lived, but said nothing to him, and allowed him to act upon the contract by delivering the fruit thereunder, without repudiating it, the facts sufficiently show a ratification of the contract by the corporation; and the corporation became estopped from denying the contract, or the effect of the assurances of its managing agent, which induced the vendor to deliver the fruit under what he had a right to believe was a valid contract.</p> <p>Id.—Ratification may be Implied.—It is not necessary that the ratification of a contract should be in express terms in order to bind the principal; but it is sufficient if it is fairly inferable from the words or conduct of the principal, and like the act of conferring an antecedent authority, ratification may be either express or implied.</p> <p>Id.—Knowledge of Details of Purchase—Duty of Principal to Make Inquiry—Negligence.—A principal who is informed of a written contract of purchase, made in his name by one assuming to act as his agent, and who is requested by the vendor to state whether the agent had authority to make it, and whether the contract is correct, is put upon inquiry as to the terms of the contract; and it is negligence for him not to take t