Smith v. Washburn-Wilson Seed Co.
| Citation | 40 Idaho 191,232 P. 574 |
| Parties | P. L. SMITH, Respondent, v. WASHBURN-WILSON SEED COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant |
| Decision Date | 02 January 1925 |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
CLAIM AND DELIVERY-RIGHT TO POSSESSION-TITLE-CHATTEL MORTGAGE-LEASE-BAILMENT-QUESTIONS OF FACT-INSTRUCTIONS.
1. Provision contained in lease examined and held to constitute a chattel mortgage.
2. Contract whereby one party was to raise a crop of peas from seed furnished by the other party, the crop to be sold to the latter at a certain specified price, examined and held to be a contract of bailment.
3. In an action in claim and delivery the controlling question is the right to possession of the property and not necessarily the title.
4. A chattel mortgagee may waive his mortgage lien, or be estopped to enforce it, by conduct inconsistent with its existence.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, for Latah County. Hon. Edgar C. Steele, Judge.
Action in claim and delivery. Judgment for plaintiff. Reversed and remanded for new trial.
Judgment reversed and a new trial granted. Costs awarded to appellant.
A. H Oversmith, for Appellant.
The contract of appellant with respondent's lessee is a contract of bailment and all of the peas grown under the contract belong to the appellant. (D. M. Ferry & Co. v Smith, 36 Idaho 67, 209 P. 1066; D. M. Ferry & Co. v Forquer, 61 Mont. 336, 29 A. L. R. 642, 202 P. 193.)
Title to crops under lease usually vests in the lessee as an incident of the lease and a reservation of title in the lessor is in the nature of a chattel mortgage and must be filed in order to become operative.
Where lessee agrees to raise crops and to deliver to lessor a share thereof as rental such share measured in crops is the amount of rental to be paid and the lessor has no title to such share or lien thereon. The lessee's sole remedy is to sue upon the breach of the contract if lessee fails to deliver the landlord's share. (Imperial Valley Milling Co. v. Globe Milling Co., 187 Cal. 352, 202 P. 129.)
There being no division of the peas in question between the landlord and the tenant, the landlord could acquire no title to any part of the peas until division was made. (Eaves v. Sheppard, 17 Idaho 268, 134 Am. St. 256, 105 P. 407.)
As between the parties a contract between lessor and lessee is binding where the lessor provides in the lease that the entire crop is to remain his until division. (Summerville v. Stockton Milling Co., supra.)
F. C. Keane, for Respondent.
A reservation of ownership of the crop in the landlord under written lease has the effect of vesting the landlord's share of the crop in him and is not in the nature of a chattel mortgage. (McNeil v. Rider, 79 Minn. 153, 79 Am. St. 437, 81 N.W. 830; Wright v. Larson, 53 Minn. 321, 38 Am. St. 504, 53 N.W. 712; Anderson v. Liston, 69 Minn. 82, 72 N.W. 52.)
Written leases may be so framed as to vest the title to the landlord's share of crops in the landlord. (Howell v. Foster, 65 Cal. 169, 3 P. 647; Wentworth v. Miller, 53 Cal. 9; Merchants' State Bank v. Sawyer etc. Co-operative Assn., 47 N.D. 375, 14 A. L. R. 1353, 182 N.W. 263; Angell v. Egger, 6 N.D. 391, 71 N.W. 547.)
The possession of the tenant is the possession of the landlord and is constructive notice to third persons of the title of the landlord. (24 Cyc. 924; McFadden v. Thorpe Elevator Co., 18 N.D. 93, 118 N.W. 242; Dobbs v. Atlas Elevator Co., 25 S.D. 177, 126 N.W. 250.)
Knowledge of the fact that tenant was renting on shares is sufficient to put third persons on inquiry concerning existence of lease reserving title in lessor. (Wood v. Price, 79 N.J. Eq. 620, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 1210, 81 A. 983, 38 L. R. A., N. S., 772; Dutton v. Warschauer, 21 Cal. 609, 82 Am. Dec. 765.)
On January 8, 1921, respondent and his wife leased certain lands in Latah county to their son, M. L. Smith, by written lease, for the term of three years beginning November 1, 1920. Among other things the lease contained the following clause:
"It is further covenanted and agreed that the title to all of the products from said premises shall be and remain in the first party until such time as said first party shall have received his full share or portion thereof."
Under the terms of the lease respondent was to receive one-third of the products of the premises. The lease contained a further stipulation that the lessee should not mortgage or dispose of any part of the products of the premises to the prejudice of the lessor and that no liens should be filed for work or labor done on the premises or on the products raised thereon. The lessee went into possession but the lease was never recorded. On April 1, 1922, the lessee entered into a written contract with appellant to grow seed peas on the leased premises. Appellant furnished the seed under the terms of its contract, the same was planted, the crop was grown and harvested and was delivered to appellant's warehouse according to the terms of the contract. The contract contained the following clause:
"That said seed stocks and the crops therefrom shall be and remain at all times the property of Washburn-Wilson Seed Co., and I will in nowise dispose of any portion of them except as provided in this contract, and should the crop through any legal process or any other cause pass from my control, the Washburn-Wilson Seed Co., may take possession of same wherever found."
As between the lessor and the lessee there was no division of the crop. Before the peas were matured appellant paid $ 600 to the lessee on the same and later was called upon to discharge certain labor liens and other encumbrances by reason of which appellant paid to the lessee $ 195 more than the contract price agreed to be paid for the peas. Respondent made no claim for any part of the peas until after the labor liens were filed, paid and discharged and we think it is clear from the record that respondent knew all about the contract entered into between the lessee and appellant. After the peas were delivered and cleaned, respondent made a demand for one-third of the crop or in lieu thereof the value of the same, which demand appellant refused to comply with. Respondent thereupon, on October 28, 1922, commenced this action in claim and delivery. To the complaint an answer was filed denying the material allegations of the complaint and setting out therein certain affirmative defenses. Upon the issues thus framed the cause was tried to the court and a jury. At the close of respondent's case and at the close of all the testimony, respectively, motions for nonsuit were made and overruled by the court. A verdict was rendered in favor of respondent for $ 604.01 upon which judgment was duly entered. This appeal is from the judgment.
Eight assignments of error are specified and relied upon by appellant. However, we shall discuss only the sixth assignment of error, which to our minds is decisive of this appeal. This assignment is predicated upon the action of the court in giving to the jury the following instruction:
"It is the rule of law that the holder of the title must prevail, and, under the evidence in this case, the court instructs you that your verdict should be in favor of the plaintiff."
From...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marshall-Wells Co. v. Kramlich
... ... misleading to the jury and error. ( Gwin v. Gwin, 5 ... Idaho 271, 48 P. 295; Smith v. Graham, 30 Idaho 132, ... 164 P. 354; Henry v. Jones, 1 Idaho 48; Lloyd v ... Anderson, ... to give an instruction upon statutes of limitation ... ( Smith v. Washburn-Wilson Seed Co., 40 Idaho 191, ... 232 P. 574.) ... Paul ... Pizey and Delana & Delana, for ... ...
-
Hopkins v. Hemsley
... ... express words, and also by implication from course of ... conduct. (Smith v. Washburn-Wilson Seed Co., (1925) ... 40 Idaho 191, 232 P. 574; Western Seed Marketing Co. v ... ...
-
Western Seed Marketing Co. v. Pfost
... ... A chattel mortgagee may waive his ... lien or be estopped to enforce it by conduct inconsistent ... with its existence. (Smith v. Washburn-Wilson Seed ... Co., 40 Idaho 191, 232 P. 574.) In the instant case, the ... appellant did not contract to buy on the faith of any ... ...
-
Cook v. Western Field Seeds, Inc.
...relying upon respondent's words, altered its position by proceeding to purchase the seed from Stolquist. See Smith v. Washburn-Wilson Seed Co., 40 Idaho 191, 232 P. 574 (1925); Idaho Bank of Commerce v. Chastain, supra; cf. C.I.T. Corp. v. Hess, 88 Idaho 1, 395 P.2d 471 (1964); Independent ......