Blonden v. General Petroleum Corp. of California, 23149.
| Decision Date | 09 July 1931 |
| Docket Number | 23149. |
| Parties | BLONDEN et ux. v. GENERAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, Whatcom County; Edwin Gruber, Judge.
Action by Frank Blonden and wife against the General Petroleum Corporation of California. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Bogle, Bogle & Gates and Warren Brown, Jr., all of Seattle, and Ralph O. Olson, of Bellingham, for appellant.
R. W Greene, of Bellingham, for respondents.
Frank Blonden and his wife entered into a written contract with General Petroleum Corporation, a corporation, whereby they leased to the corporation a gasoline service station and equipment owned by them in Bellingham for the period commencing June 1, 1929, and ending June 25, 1930, in consideration of $5 per month and one cent per gallon for all gasoline sold at the station. The lessors agreed to and did handle motor fuel products purchased from the corporation during the term of the lease. After the expiration of the term, they brought this action to recover one cent per gallon on 33,918 gallons of gasoline sold by them and to recover also, $65 for the thirteen monthly payments due under the contract, making a total of $404.18.
By its answer the corporation admitted the contract and that the plaintiffs had handled its gasoline, and affirmatively pleaded payment of all its obligations under the contract. Plaintiffs denied defendant's allegation of payment. Upon the trial to a jury there was a verdict for the plaintiffs in the sum of $209. The defendant has appealed from a judgment on the verdict.
The respondents' proof showed that they sold the amount of gasoline stated in the complaint. On the part of the appellant it was shown that it had made thirteen $5 payments by check during the term. As to the one cent per gallon on the amount of gasoline delivered, appellant's proof tended to show that the gasoline was delivered as needed from time to time by a distributing agent by a gasoline tank wagon, and that at each sale a 'delivery receipt' was made out in duplicate, one of which was delivered to the respondents showing the number of gallons of gasoline delivered, upon which statement appears, in rubber stamp form, 'Retail price,' and also, 'less--lease gallonage rental' and 'commission as per agreement,' a separate line for each of those items and each line of which was filled in by writing the amount, the retail price according to the price of oil at the time. As an example, one receipt shows: 200 gallons, retail price 20 1/2 cents, $41; less lease gallonage rental 1 cent per gallon $2; less commission as per agreement 3 cents per gallon, $6--leaving a balance of $33. Some two hundred of these statements were introduced in evidence. They varied as to the number of gallons purchased and the price per gallon, all of them containing the item of one cent on the line 'lease gallonage rental,' while on the line 'commission as per agreement' the amount stated is generally 3 cents, but a number of them contain either 5 cents or 4 cents per gallon, all of which were the subject of more or less testimony and explanation by the witnesses.
The respondents, while admitting they received the thirteen $5 checks, testified that they surrendered each check back to the corporation so as to save, about the first of each month an unauthorized additional charge of 2 1/2 cents per gallon on the first two hundred gallons of gasoline delivered that month, and that each payment of $5 was therefore no compensation whatever to them. Their testimony as to the one cent per gallon was to the effect that they never received it as rent or at all; that they had no commission contract whatever with the appellant, but that their contract was that they were to get the gasoline at 4 cents per gallon less than the...
To continue reading
Request your trial