Sherwood Bros. v. Seattle Fruit & Produce Auction Co.

Citations

• 93 Wash. 544
• 161 P. 371
• 1916 Wash. LEXIS 1236

Syllabus

<p>Factors- — Commissions—Contract—Evidence—Findings. Where parties disagreed as to the terms of a special contract for the sale of goods on commission, the fact that the court did not find the contract exactly as claimed by either party, but adopted the testimony of each in part, does not amount to a finding that there was no meeting of the minds upon any definite contract.</p> <p>Same — Authority — Employing Subagents. A factor operating under an express contract to market fruit for a commission has no power to employ subagents at the owner’s expense and deduct their commissions, and the power is not implied from the mere fact of employment.</p> <p>Same — Commissions—Contract—Evidence — Sufficiency. Findings that fruit was to be marketed for a specified commission, without deductions for the commissions of subagents in the east, are sustained where that version of the contract was corroborated by the fact that the amount of such deductions was not agreed upon when the contract was made, and that both the fact and the amount of the deductions made were persistently concealed in making statements of all the other expenses incurred.</p>