Hall v. Pierce

• Decision Date: 31 January 1870
• Citation: 4 W.Va. 107
• Parties: Cyrus Hall v. J. 0. Pierce, et. al.
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court

4 W.Va. 107

Cyrus Hall

v.J. 0. Pierce, et. al.

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

January Term, 1870.

1. A case in which the relation of principal and agent is held to exist.

2. H. sells to the agent of P. a certain quantity of petroleum oil at twelve

cents per gallon, to be delivered at a certain place at a certain time. H. delivers the oil as agreed upon, but the agent refuses to accept and receive it. P. being a non-resident, H. brings a suit in chancery and attaches the oil and certain moneys of P. in bank, and asks in his bill that the oil be sold and the money in bank be applied to the payment of his debt for the whole value of the oil at the stipulated price of twelve cents per gallon. The oil is sold pendente lite. The court below dismissed the bill with costs. Held:

1. That there was an irregularity in the proceeding so far as it assumed that the title to the oil was in P., the contract being only executory; and upon the refusal of the agent to accept and receive the oil, the title thereto remained in H., and his measure of damages was the difference between the contract price and the actual value at the time of delivery.

2. As it does not appear that there was any unfairness in the sale of the oil under the order of the court, the irregularity cannot be of any consequence.

3. Whenever the object of a bill is to recover money for any debt, or on the breach of any contract, or on account of any other matter, and it is shown that the complainant is entitled, to any sum on account of the particular matters and transactions alleged in the bill, though it may be on other grounds, and for different reasons, and for a less amount than is alleged and claimed in the bill, the amount to which the complainant may be so entitled, may be decreed him under the prayer of general relief in the bill.

4. H. is entitled to recover the difference between the contract price and the fair value of the oil at the time of delivery, which is shown to be eight cents per gallon.

The summons in this cause was brought to January rules, 1868, in the circuit court of Wood county. The suit was In equity, the defendant Pierce being a non-resident, and an attachment was issued. The final decree was entered at the June term, 1868, dismissing the bill.

A sufficient statement of the points arising in the cause appears in the opinion of Judge Berkshire.

Lee and Hutchinson for the appellant. Edmiston and Sands for the appellees.

Berkshire, J. On the 16th of October, 1867, the appellant, by a written contract of that date, sold and agreed to deliver to J. Bayless, as agent for the appellee, J. 0. Pierce, 2, 000 barrels of Burning Spring crude oil, to be delivered in bulk on first water at Parkersburg, at twelve cents per gallon; and the said Bayless, as agent, agreed to advance to the said Hall two thousand dollars for the purchase money for said oil.

It appears that in pursuance of this contract, as it is claimed, the appellant some time afterwards delivered and had at Parkersburg and the immediate vicinity, in the Little Kanawha river, upwards of two thousand barrels, in bulk, of Burning Spring oil, which he insisted on said Bayless, as the agent of Pierce, accepting in fulfillment of the said contract, which, however, Bayless declined to do, and refused to receive the same, and thereupon this suit was Instituted.

The bill alleges the contract with Bayless, as agent of Pierce; the fulfillment of it, on the part of the complainant, by the delivery of the oil at Parkersburg, on first water, to Bayless, as agent of Pierce, and the refusal of the latter to pay for said oil 9, 600 dollars; and that Pierce is a non-resident of the State; and an attachment was sued out and levied on the oil so delivered, as the property of Pierce; and the Rational Bank of Parkersburg, which is alleged to be the debtor of Pierce, is also made a party defendant.

The hill prays, that the property levied on be decreed to be sold and the proceeds applied towards the payment of the complainant's demand, and that the bank be required to pay over to the complainant the amount it may be indebted to Pierce; and there also is a prayer for general relief.

The answer of Pierce denies the agency and authority of Bayless to make the contract entered into, which resulted in this controversy, or to make any contract with the complainant at the time of said contract, for the delivery of the said oil; also denies that the appellee agreed, through his agent, to pay the sum of two thousand dollars, or any sum, in payment of said oil; also the delivery of the two thousand barrels of oil at Parkersburg, or any quantity whatever, to the appellee or his agent; and it is also claimed that, on the face, and by the terms of said contract, Bayless alone, and not the appellee, is bound by it; and it is further averred that the contract was never, in fact, fully executed, or delivered for the purpose of being a binding contract between the parties.

Numerous depositions were taken in the cause, which, however, I shall not advert to in detail; and the cause being heard on the merits, a final decree was entered dismissing the complainant's bill with costs. It is of this decree that complaint is made here.

I will consider the questions in the cause in their natural order.

The first, necessarily, is the authority of Bayless to make the contract with the appellant, now in question.

The first evidence of the agency of Bayless found in the record, is the letter or instructions, in writing, of the appellee Pierce, to the national bank of Parkersburg, of the 10th of September, 1867. It is as follows: WmStLouis, September 10th, 1867. Cashier Old Parkersburg Nat. Bank, enclosed you will find draft on New York for eight thousand dollars for the use of J. Bayless. He is authorized to use the same, as follows: to put up 1 dollar per barrel margin, on the six thousand barrels of oil, bought for delivery, by first water, provided the other party put up the same amount in cash, not otherwise, or to use the...