Rubinstein v. Washington Cold Storage Co.
Decision Date | 19 June 1943 |
Docket Number | 28916. |
Citation | 138 P.2d 852,18 Wn.2d 238 |
Parties | RUBINSTEIN v. WASHINGTON COLD STORAGE CO. et al. |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Action by Carl Rubinstein against the Washington Cold Storage Company and others, to recover value of whiskey stored with named defendant. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Calvin S. Hall, judge.
Skeel McKelvy, Henke, Evenson & Uhlmann, of Seattle, for appellant.
Ryan Askren & Mathewson, of Seattle, for respondents.
This is an action by Carl Rubinstein, the appellant here and plaintiff below, to recover the reasonable value of nine barrels of whiskey stored with the Washington Cold Storage Company in Seattle, Washington. Prior to commencement of the action, Washington Cold Storage Company dissolved by voluntary proceedings of the stockholders. All of the assets of the corporation were distributed to the defendant, Pacific Fruit & Produce Company, a corporation which was the beneficial owner of all of the stock of said corporation. The defendants Tom S. Patterson and W. A. Yeomans were each the owners of record of one share of stock but beneficial ownership therein was vested in Pacific Fruit & Produce Co. The defendant C. L. Anderson was the liquidating trustee appointed by the stockholders to complete the dissolution of the corporation. For the purpose of this opinion we will refer to the Washington Cold Storage Company as if it were the principal respondent because all testimony and evidence relates to it.
On June 30, 1934, Northwest Distilleries, Inc., a Washington corporation, with its office in Seattle, Washington, stored in the warehouse of the cold storage company twelve barrels of whiskey all of which were described in the negotiable warehouse receipt. Thereafter three of said barrels were withdrawn and delivered by the defendant, leaving remaining subject to the receipt the nine barrels involved in this action.
The evidence shows that the warehouse receipt in question was pledged to National Bank of Commerce, Seattle, Washington, to secure advances made to Northwest Distilleries, Inc., to whom the warehouse receipt was issued. Those advances were guaranteed by Carl Rubinstein who was later called upon to and did pay off the obligations due the bank, whereupon the warehouse receipt was assigned and delivered to him. For the purpose of this case Carl Rubinstein may be considered as the owner of the warehouse receipt.
The complaint alleges that on or about July 1, 1940, upon inspection being made by the U.S. Government Liquor Inspector of liquor in storage for the purpose of imposing federal liquor tax, it was discovered that all nine barrels held by the storage company under said warehouse receipt were entirely empty and contained no whiskey whatever.
The respondents in their answer denied that there was any whiskey in the barrels at the time demand was made for delivery thereof and as an affirmative defense alleged that the whiskey placed in storage was improperly packaged so that the same leaked out and was entirely destroyed and lost through no fault whatsoever of the Washington Cold Storage Company, or any of the defendants.
The controverted issue here relates solely to the question of whether respondent adequately performed its duties as bailee with respect to the nine barrels of warehoused whiskey.
It is appellant's position that the evidence falls short of sustaining the essential findings upon which the decision was predicated. They are paragraphs VII, VIII, IX and X of the Findings of Fact which are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial