Matthews Company, Inc. v. Pehrson

225 N.W. 921, 178 Minn. 618, 1929 Minn. LEXIS 1254
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJune 28, 1929
DocketNo. 27,363.
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 225 N.W. 921 (Matthews Company, Inc. v. Pehrson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matthews Company, Inc. v. Pehrson, 225 N.W. 921, 178 Minn. 618, 1929 Minn. LEXIS 1254 (Mich. 1929).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from a judgment rendered against him in the district court for $184.95.

The case was first tried in municipal court, and from the judgment entered therein defendant appealed to the district court, where it was tried to the court without a jury.

Action to recover on two written rental contracts, each for a display advertising metal bulletin board. Defendant was a sole dealer doing business as the Canby Baking Company. The contracts were signed in the name of the said company by the son of defendant.

The stipulated facts, among other things, showed that at the time the contracts were signed the son was in charge of and conducting the business (his father residing in another city) doing all things required to be done in that respect; hired and discharged employes; bought supplies; sold the products and collected therefor; supervised the baking and work of the establishment; deposited the funds of the business in a bank and drew checks thereon in the name of the company for the payment of bills and expenses of said business; and that no one else, during said period, took any part in the management or conduct thereof; that in the making and delivery of said contracts said son represented himself to the plaintiff as the manager of the business and that plaintiff has fully performed its part *619 of the terms and conditions of the contracts; that a payment was made thereon by check, signed by the son, drawn on company funds in the bank.

The court found as a fact that plaintiff and defendant entered into the contracts, thus holding that the acts done by the son were binding upon defendant. The above recited facts, together with others appearing in the record, amply justified the finding just referred to, and the conclusions of, law reached were therefore correct.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Duluth Herald & News Tribune v. Plymouth Optical Co.
176 N.W.2d 552 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1970)
Lindstrom v. Minnesota Liquid Fertilizer Co.
119 N.W.2d 855 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 N.W. 921, 178 Minn. 618, 1929 Minn. LEXIS 1254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-company-inc-v-pehrson-minn-1929.