General Elec. Co. v. Brower
Decision Date | 08 February 1915 |
Docket Number | 2449. |
Parties | GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. v. BROWER. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
On July 8, 1912, the appellant entered into a contract with the Andrus-Cushing Lighting Fixture Company, a corporation, by which it agreed to consign incandescent lamps manufactured by it to the Andrus Company for sale on a commission basis. On August 14, 1913, the Andrus Company was adjudged a bankrupt. At that time it had in its possession lamps which had been consigned under the contract, and which had not been sold. Those lamps were subsequently taken by the trustee in bankruptcy, who claimed the right to hold them for the benefit of creditors. On October 8, 1913, the appellant filed a petition in the bankruptcy proceeding, claiming title to the lamps. On October 15, 1913, it filed objections to the confirmation of the sale of the lamps by the trustee. Both the petition and the objections came on for hearing before the referee. The trustee contended that, by the contract under which the lamps had been consigned, an actual sale was made, and that, if the sale was not absolute, it was conditional, and therefore void as to creditors because not recorded. The referee sustained the trustee's contention and the District Court affirmed the referee's decision. From the judgment of that court, the present appeal is taken.
The contract is as follows:
'The agent shall conform to the educational and engineering instructions of the manufacturer, and shall advise with and instruct prospective purchasers as to the classes and types of lamps best suited to their several requirements in order to secure a maximum illumination for a minimum expenditure, and shall conduct the business hereunder to the satisfaction of the manufacturer.
'(4) All of the agent's books and records relating to his transactions in connection with the sale and distribution of the manufacturer's lamps shall at all times during business hours be open to the inspection of any duly authorized representative of the manufacturer.
'(5) The agent shall pay all expenses in the storage, cartage, transportation, handling and sale of lamps hereunder, and all expense incident thereto and to the accounting and collection of accounts thus created. The agent shall be allowed, as compensation for the performance of all obligations hereunder, the difference between the amounts received from the sale of the lamps and their value on the basis of a discount of 29 per cent. from list prices as to the time fixed by the manufacturer. The manufacturer agrees that if the agent sells, during the period of this appointment, a quantity of lamps the value of which would entitle him to a higher basis of compensation, as shown in schedules presented herewith, the manufacturer will at once credit the agent with an amount equal to the difference between the compensation he has been receiving and the compensation he then becomes entitled to.
'(6) The agent shall render to the manufacturer, not later than the tenth of every month, a report, on forms provided by the manufacturer, covering his sales of the manufacturer's lamps during the preceding calendar month.
'The agent shall pay over to the manufacturer, not later than the tenth of every month, an amount equal to the total sales value of all lamps sold hereunder, less the compensation due the agent, for which collections have been made by the agent during the preceding calendar month, and a further amount equal to the total sales value, less the compensation due the agent, on all lamps sold by the agent to customers whose accounts covering such lamps are, on the first of the month past due,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Stearns Coal & Lumber Co. v. Van Winkle
... ... passed to certain heirs, including plaintiff Van Winkle. By ... virtue, thus, of the general terms of her will, whatever ... legal interest she held in the corporate assets passed, ... ...
-
United States v. General Electric Co.
...credere factor or agent. This conclusion is not only supported, but compelled, by the following authorities: General Electric Co. v. Brower (9 C. C. A.) 221 F. 597, 137 C. C. A. 321; General Elec. Co. v. Commercial Elec. Supply Co. (Mo. App.) 191 S. W. 1106; In re Taft (6 C. C. A.) 133 F. 5......
-
Dryden v. Michigan State Industries
...and in other cases no separate bank accounts have been kept or required. Hamilton Nat. Bank v. McCallum, supra; General Elec. Co. v. Brower, 221 F. 597, 601 (C. C. A. 9); see also, Cable v. Iowa State Sav. Bank, 197 Iowa, 393, 194 N. W. 957, 959, 197 N. W. 434, 31 A. L. R. 748. The final ma......
-
General Electric Co. v. Willey's Carbide Tool Co.
...The consignment agency agreements in question are similar in character to those which have been sustained in General Electric Company v. Brower, 9 Cir., 221 F. 597, and United States v. General Electric Company, 272 U.S. 476, 47 S.Ct. 192, 71 L.Ed. 362, as creating the bona fide relation of......