EARL V. SAKS & CO. 36 Cal.2d 602 (1951) CASE BRIEF

EARL V. SAKS & CO.

36 Cal.2d 602 (1951)

NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over the ownership and sale of a mink coat.

FACTS: Barbee and Mrs. Earl went to the fur salon in Saks. A mink coat was looked at and the quoted price was $5,000. Barbee told Saks that he would like to get the coat for Mrs. Earl but he would pay not more than $4,000. Saks rejected repeated offers to sell at $4,000. Unknown to Barbee, Mrs. Earl made a behind the door deal with them to sell the coat to Barbee for $3,981.25 with Mrs. Earl making up the difference. The store then made out a sales slip and Barbee signed for it. Barbee then gave the coat as a gift to Mrs. Earl. She left the store with the coat. The next day she returned and paid the balance of the real purchase price to Saks. Later that same day, Barbee told Saks that he had revoked the gift to Mrs. Earl and that he was the owner of the coat and that Saks should deliver the coat to him and not to Mrs. Earl. Mrs. Earl demanded that the coat be delivered to her. Sakes refused and attempted to return her $918.30 but she refused the money. Saks retained possession of the coat. Mrs. Earl (P) then sued Saks (D) alleging conversion of the coat. D filed a cross complaint interpleader stating that it did not care who the coat would be delivered to but it simply wanted the full purchase price. D admitted the back door deal with P. P admitted the back door deal and Barbee in his pleadings admitted that he told D he would only buy the coat at his stated pricing and that had he known of the back door deal he would not have agreed to purchase the coat. The trial court determined that P was the owner and Barbee owed D the balance of the purchase price. Barbee appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner