Broaddus v. Commercial Nat. Bank of Muskogee

• Decision Date: 23 June 1925
• Docket Number: 15512.
• Citation: 237 P. 583,113 Okla. 10,42 A.L.R. 1331,1925 OK 527
• Parties: BROADDUS et al. v. COMMERCIAL NAT. BANK OF MUSKOGEE et al.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

237 P. 583

113 Okla. 10, 42 A.L.R. 1331, 1925 OK 527

BROADDUS et al. v. COMMERCIAL NAT. BANK OF MUSKOGEE et al.

No. 15512.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

June 23, 1925

Syllabus by the Court.

The fact that the landlord of an office building furnishes janitor service to his tenants, and the fact that the landlord and his servants possess keys and have access to said offices at all times outside of office hours, does not constitute the landlord a bailee of the tenants' offices and contents during such time, where the tenants and their employees possess keys and have access to said offices at all times. To constitute a "bailment," there must be a delivery and full transfer, either actual or constructive, of the property to the bailee, so as to exclude the possession of the owner and all other persons, and give to the bailee for the time being, the sole custody and control thereof.

Where the issue as to whether the landlord was negligent in the employment of dishonest janitors, and the issue as to whether the damage of cross-petitioners was caused by the negligence of such agents, were properly submitted to a jury, the verdict of the jury, being reasonably supported by the evidence, will not be disturbed on appeal.

Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Bailment means a delivery of personalty for some partiular purpose, or on mere deposit on contract, express or implied, that after purpose has been fulfilled it shall be redelivered to person who delivered it or otherwise dealt with according to his directions, or kept until he claims it, as case may be.

Appeal from District Court, Muskogee County; E. A. Summers, Judge.

Action by the Commercial National Bank of Muskogee and another against B. Broaddus and another. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Paul C Williams, of Muskogee, for plaintiffs in error.

Benj. Martin and W. K. Zachry, both of Muskogee, for defendants in error.

MASON J.

The Commercial National Bank, of Muskogee, Okl., and Johnella P Barnes, as plaintiffs, commenced this action by filing their petition in the district court of Muskogee county, Okl., alleging, in substance, that the defendants B. Broaddus and C. A. Ambrister were indebted to said plaintiffs in the sum of $115 as rent for space occupied by them in an office building owned by the plaintiffs in the city of Muskogee, known as the Commercial National Bank building, or the Barnes building. For convenience, the parties will be referred to as they appeared in the trial court.

The defendants admitted that they had been tenants in said building for a number of years, and that they had been paying $80 per month as rent, and that they were indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of $115.

Further answering, and by way of cross-petition, the defendants alleged that a part of the consideration for the space occupied in the building of the plaintiffs was the janitor service, heat, light, and safety from burglary or fire.

The defendants further alleged that on the 1st day of July, 1922, they placed $90 in currency in a safe belonging to said defendants and situated in the space occupied by them in said building; that said safe was a combination safe and filing cabinet composed of steel, and that said safe had a combination lock thereon; that, after said money had been placed in said safe, the bolts to the lock were thrown, but that said defendant did not remember whether the combination was turned or not, but was of the opinion that said door was not locked; that, when said defendants returned Monday morning to said office, the said money was gone, by reason of the negligence of the servants and employees of the plaintiffs, in either appropriating the money to themselves or in leaving the door unlocked so that other parties could come into said office and secure the property located therein; that said defendants and their stenographer were the only persons having a key to said office, except the keys which were held by the plaintiffs or by their servants and employees; that, when said office was left by the defendants, the same was securely locked, and, when they returned Monday morning, the doors had not been broken into or the persons entering same had not done so by way of the transom.

The defendants further alleged that on Saturday, the 11th day of August, 1922, they placed in said safe situated in said office the sum of $25, which was received after banking hours, and that the same was found missing on Monday morning when the defendants opened their office. The defendants further alleged that the doors did not appear to have been broken, and that entrance was not made by way of the transom.

It was further alleged that, by reason of the carelessness of the plaintiffs, their servants, and employees, the defendants had lost the total sum of $115.

To this answer and cross-petition the plaintiffs filed their amended reply, consisting of a general denial, and further allegation that, if the defendants suffiered loss or damage by reason of the things complained of by them in their answer and cross-petition, the same was brought about and contributed to by the negligence and carelessness of said defendants.

The defendants having admitted the allegations of the plaintiffs' petition, the cause was tried to the jury on the cross-petition of the defendants, which resulted in the verdict for the plaintiffs for the full amount sued for. From the judgment rendered on such verdict, and the court's order overruling their motion for new trial, the defendants prosecute this appeal.

For reversal it is first contended that the relation of bailor and bailee existed between the cross-petitioners and the plaintiffs at the time of the occurrence in question, and that the trial court erred in refusing to submit this theory of the case to the jury.

Bailment is defined as follows:

"A delivery of goods in trust, upon a contract expressed or implied, that the trust shall be executed and the goods restored by the bailee, as soon as the purpose of the bailment shall be answered." 2 Kent's Comm. 559.

"A bailment may be defined as a delivery of personalty for some particular purpose, or on mere deposit, upon a contract, express or implied, that after the purpose has been fulfilled it

...