Sinclair Refining Co. v. Shaffer
| Decision Date | 13 October 1936 |
| Docket Number | 27053. |
| Citation | 61 P.2d 571,177 Okla. 610,1936 OK 616 |
| Parties | SINCLAIR REFINING CO. v. SHAFFER. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Where there is testimony reasonably tending to support the verdict, the Supreme Court will not substitute its judgment for that of the jury, and the determination of fact by the jury will not be disturbed on appeal.
2. Exemplary damages are recoverable only in actions for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, where the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice actual or presumed.
Appeal from District Court, McCurtain County; Geo. R. Childers Judge.
Action by Cleo C. Shaffer against Sinclair Refining Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Affirmed as modified.
V. R Tomlinson, of St. Louis, Mo., and E. C. Armstrong, of Idabel for plaintiff in error.
J. N. Fortner and H. C. Ray, both of Idabel, for defendant in error.
This is an action to recover damages for breach of contract. It was originally brought in the district court of McCurtain county by Cleo C. Shaffer, as plaintiff, against Sinclair Refining Company and J. E. Fincher, defendants. Before the trial the action was dismissed as to Fincher. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $929.20, of which amount the sum of $429.20 was for compensatory damages, and the sum of $500 for punitive damages. The trial court rendered judgment upon the verdict accordingly, and the defendant, Sinclair Refining Company, brings this appeal. For brevity, the parties will be referred to herein as Shaffer, Fincher and Sinclair.
Fincher was bulk sales agent for Sinclair at Idabel, and also owned a filling station property there, which he leased to Shaffer for the purpose of operating a service station for retailing Sinclair products. Sinclair entered into a written contract with Shaffer designated as "Equipment Rental Agreement," by which Sinclair rented to Shaffer the necessary equipment for handling, storing, dispensing and advertising said products, said agreement to continue as long as mutually agreeable to the parties, but providing that either party may terminate the same at any time upon giving thirty days written notice to the other party. Fincher signed the "Land Owner's Contract," consenting to the installation of the equipment, disclaiming any title or right therein by reason of the installation, and agreeing to the removal thereof by Sinclair as specified in the agreement.
About six weeks after Shaffer commenced operating under the contract, Fincher and one J. D. Carmichael, representatives of Sinclair went to the station and proposed buying out Shaffer in order that they might place one Buster Westmoreland in charge of the station, but they failed to reach an agreement with Shaffer to sell out to them or to Westmoreland. The next day Fincher went to Shaffer's filling station and removed the handles and hose from the pumps and carried them away without the consent and over the protest of Shaffer, thereby depriving Shaffer of the use of the equipment and forcing him out of business.
Sinclair's answer, in addition to a general denial, specifically alleges that Shaffer had breached the contract by failure to operate the station; that he used other products than the products of Sinclair, and that the contract was terminated by mutual consent.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial