In re Berkebile

W.D. New York

In re Berkebile

144 F. 572, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. New York

DecidedFebruary 24, 1905

DocketNo. 1,746

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 144 F. 572 (In re Berkebile) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Berkebile, 144 F. 572, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15 (W.D.N.Y. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

HAZEL, District Judge.

A fair presumption based upon the evidence is justifiable, I think, that the contract of. the husband to construct the houses mentioned was the contract of the wife.' Ratification of the acts by the principal implies a knowledge of the circumstances upon which the liability is predicated. Such knowledge may be inferred from' Mrs. Berkebile’s acts in making assignments of moneys due or to become due upon the contract. She was not ignorant of her rights and liabilities under the contract. She became a known principal by her acquiescence and acts; and she induced the belief that prior thereto her husband acted as her duly authorized agent in the construction of the buildings specified in the building contract without disclosing Mrs. Berkebile’s interest therein as principal. I think the bankrupt, because of the facts, is estopped to deny the Brady indebtedness.

The preliminary objection that the petition is defective having been waived, the report is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

HAZEL, District Judge.

A fair presumption based upon the evidence is justifiable, I think, that the contract of. the husband to construct the houses mentioned was the contract of the wife.' Ratification of the acts by the principal implies a knowledge of the circumstances upon which the liability is predicated. Such knowledge may be inferred from' Mrs. Berkebile’s acts in making assignments of moneys due or to become due upon the contract. She was not ignorant of her rights and liabilities under the contract. She became a known principal by her acquiescence and acts; and she induced the belief that prior thereto her husband acted as her duly authorized agent in the construction of the buildings specified in the building contract without disclosing Mrs. Berkebile’s interest therein as principal. I think the bankrupt, because of the facts, is estopped to deny the Brady indebtedness.

The preliminary objection that the petition is defective having been waived, the report is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 F. 572, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-berkebile-nywd-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack