Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co. of Pennsylvania
| Decision Date | 18 July 1975 |
| Citation | 331 N.E.2d 813,368 Mass. 811 |
| Parties | Richard CELLUCCI v. SUN OIL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Paul R. Sugarman, Boston (Charles E. Blumsack, Boston, with him), for defendant.
David H. Locke, Wellesley (A. Arnold Lundwall, Wellesley, with him), for plaintiff.
Before TAURO, C.J., and REARDON, QUIRICO, KAPLAN and WILKINS, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
This matter is here for further review from the Appeals Court. The plaintiff's suit sought specific performance of an alleged purchase and sale agreement of certain land owned by the plaintiff which the defendant was to purchase as a site for a filling station. Notwithstanding that the defendant did not execute the agreement, the relief sought was granted by the trial judge on a theory of estoppel. The evidence was reported and the judge filed a report of material facts. The Appeals Court modified the final decree and affirmed it as modified in --- Mass.App. --- a, 320 N.E.2d 919 (1974). We agree with the action of the Appeals Court. Its opinion contains a full discussion of the facts and law which need not be duplicated here. Based on the judge's findings, an estoppel could lie as a result of misrepresentations of both fact and law by the defendant's agent, an employee who represented the company in real estate transactions in the area. The defendant contends that it cannot be bound by the agent's misrepresentations because the contract stated, and the plaintiff knew, that the agent lacked authority to commit the defendant to the contract. However, while the defendant might not have clothed the agent with authority to execute the contract, it placed him in a position of sufficient ostensible authority to negotiate it to the point where all that was necessary was its formal execution. See McQuade v. Springfield Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 333 Mass. 229, 233, 129 N.E.2d 923 (1955); Costonis v. Medford Housing Authy., 343 Mass. 108, 115, 176 N.E.2d 25 (1961); Restatement 2d: Agency, § 54 (1958). Consequently, the defendant must be held responsible for the manner in which the agent conducted himself during those negotiations. Haskell v. Starbird, 152 Mass. 117, 120, 142 N.E. 695 (1890). Restatement 2d: Agency, § 8A, comment b, § 261 (1958). Cf. Bates v. Southgate, 308 Mass. 170, 183, 31 N.E.2d 551 (1941). The defendant also objects to the modification of the final decree by the Appeals Court whereby the plaintiff is excused from obtaining various permits and licenses as conditions precedent. --- Mass.App. ---, --- b, 320 N.E.2d 919 (1974). However, the plaintiff did obtain the permit of principal importance: the gasoline storage permit. The securing of any further permits required the defendant's cooperation, which was not forthcoming although the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his obligations. Further, there is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mass Cash Register, Inc. v. Comtrex Systems Corp.
...as a consequence of the act or omission. Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co., 2 Mass.App.Ct. 722, 728, 320 N.E.2d 919 (1974), aff'd, 368 Mass. 811, 331 N.E.2d 813 (1975). Accord Frederick v. ConAgra, Inc., 713 F.Supp. at 45. "`An essential element under the promissory estoppel theory is that there be a......
-
Piantes v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc.
...which was remedied in the following cases: Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co., 2 Mass.App.Ct. 722, 728-729, 320 N.E.2d 919 (1974) aff'd 368 Mass. 811, 331 N.E.2d 813 (1975) (after promise by defendant to buy land, plaintiff broke off negotiations with competing buyer, and obtained permits required by ......
-
Renovator's Supply, Inc. v. Sovereign Bank
... ... E.2d 176 (1978) (general contractor relied upon an erroneous price quotation from a subcontractor and incurred resulting financial losses); Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co., 2 Mass.App.Ct. 722, 723-727, 320 N.E.2d 919 (1974), S.C., 368 Mass. 811, 331 N.E.2d 813 (1975) (commercial property owner lost ... ...
-
Makino, U.S.A., Inc. v. Metlife Capital Credit Corp.
...binds his principal. Bockser v. Dorchester Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 327 Mass. 473, 477, 99 N.E.2d 640 (1951). Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co., 368 Mass. 811, 812, 331 N.E.2d 813 (1975). Liability results if "the agent's position facilitates ... the fraud, in that from the point of view of the third pers......