Ramish v. Marsh

California Supreme Court

Ramish v. Marsh

172 P. 1100, 178 Cal. 217, 1918 Cal. LEXIS 454

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMay 3, 1918

DocketL. A. No. 4239. Department Two.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 172 P. 1100 (Ramish v. Marsh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ramish v. Marsh, 172 P. 1100, 178 Cal. 217, 1918 Cal. LEXIS 454 (Cal. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

WILBUR, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, based in part upon a common-law award of three arbitrators, selected to adjust the partnership' accounts of plaintiff and defendant, in accordance with a written agreement of arbitration. Defendant resists said award on the ground of many alleged informalities in the proceedings of said arbitrators. The findings are in favor of said award. It is also found that after the award, the defendant “told plaintiff to draw money from the Metropolitan Contracting Company (a corporation owned by plaintiff and defendant) and to credit the amount so drawn as payments upon the sum due from defendant to plaintiff under and by virtue of the award of said arbitrators,” and this was done; and as a conclusion of law holds that the defendant had waived any irregularities in the arbitration.

As the arbitration was for the benefit of both parties, their acceptance of the award, and the payment thereunder by defendant to plaintiff, would constitute a waiver of any irregularities in the award. (See on this point, Matter of Silliman, 159 Cal. 155, [113 Pac. 135]; Dore v. Southern Pac. Co., 163 Cal. 182, [124 Pac. 817]; 5 Corpus Juris, 170, sec. 426.)

Judgment affirmed.

Melvin, J., and Victor E'. Shaw, J., pro tern., concurred.

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

WILBUR, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, based in part upon a common-law award of three arbitrators, selected to adjust the partnership' accounts of plaintiff and defendant, in accordance with a written agreement of arbitration. Defendant resists said award on the ground of many alleged informalities in the proceedings of said arbitrators. The findings are in favor of said award. It is also found that after the award, the defendant “told plaintiff to draw money from the Metropolitan Contracting Company (a corporation owned by plaintiff and defendant) and to credit the amount so drawn as payments upon the sum due from defendant to plaintiff under and by virtue of the award of said arbitrators,” and this was done; and as a conclusion of law holds that the defendant had waived any irregularities in the arbitration.

As the arbitration was for the benefit of both parties, their acceptance of the award, and the payment thereunder by defendant to plaintiff, would constitute a waiver of any irregularities in the award. (See on this point, Matter of Silliman, 159 Cal. 155, [113 Pac. 135]; Dore v. Southern Pac. Co., 163 Cal. 182, [124 Pac. 817]; 5 Corpus Juris, 170, sec. 426.)

Judgment affirmed.

Melvin, J., and Victor E'. Shaw, J., pro tern., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 P. 1100, 178 Cal. 217, 1918 Cal. LEXIS 454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramish-v-marsh-cal-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack