PEARCE PRODUCE CO., INC., A CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
HERBERT LEE, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Pearce Produce Co. sought certiorari to challenge a Circuit Court judgment affirming a Civil Court decision against it regarding unpaid proceeds from tomatoes delivered to Lee for packing and sale. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' judgments, finding that Lee was estopped from denying his principal's ownership and liability for the funds received.
Lee is estopped from denying the ownership of his principal and his liability to his principal for the amount received from the sale of the tomatoes. The lower courts did not depart from the essential requirements of law in a manner that prejudiced Lee's legal rights.
“By these transactions, no other claim having been interposed by any other person or persons claiming to be the owner or owners of the tomatoes, the defendant was estopped from denying the ownership of its principal and liability of it to its principal for the amount received for the tomatoes.”
Establishes the core legal principle that Lee is estopped from denying his principal's ownership and his liability for proceeds received from sale of the tomatoes.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePearce Produce delivered tomatoes to Herbert Lee with authority to pack and sell them. Lee received, packed, and sold the tomatoes and received the pr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Exclusion Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before us on certiorari to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, affirming the judgment of the Civil Court of Record of that county. It is contended here that the Circuit Court failed to observe the essential requirements' of law in affirming a judgment of the Civil Court of Record in which that court failed to observe the ess'ential requirements of law in such latter court.. On the trial of the cause certain legal and material evidence was excluded when properly tendered and other illegal and irrelevant evidence was admitted over the timely objection of the defendant in that court..
All of the evidence involved pertaining to the ownership of certain tomatoes delivered to the defendant by the plaintiff to be packed and sold and which were packed and sold by the defendant, but the proceeds of which were not paid over to the plaintiff. The uncontradicted evidence shows that the plaintiff delivered the tomatoes to the defendant with authority to pack and sell the same. The defendant received, packed and sold the tomatoes and received the proceeds'. The defendant delivered to the plaintiff certain manifests which showed receipt from the plaintiff from the defendant, sales by the defendant and account sales rendered' to the plaintiff. By these transactions, no other claim having been interposed by any other person or per*227sons claiming to be the owner or owners of the tomatoes, the defendant was estopped from denying the ownership of its principal and liability of it to its principal for the amount received for the tomatoes. This is elementary and requires the citation of no authorities to support the principle involved.
One of the manifests or accounts stated rendered to the plaintiff by the defendant shows that a large sum of money had been charged to the account of the plaintiff and credited to the account of another, but there is nothing in the record showing a written agreement or memorandum signed by the plaintiff assuihing the liability for such account or indebtedness of such other person to the defendant. We, therefore, find from the record that there was no departure from the essential requirements of the law which prejudiced the legal rights of the defendant and that the writ of certiorari heretofore issued should be quashed. It is s'o ordered.
Writ of certiorari quashed.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Ellis, J., agrees to quash the writ.
BrowN, J., not participating.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lang v. Quaker Realty Corp., 131 Fla. 179 (Fla. 1938)…aphs heretofore quoted, must be determined in part adversely to the contention of the appellants. Appellee contends that the answer to the question as presented by [*185] the first sub-paragraph is to be found in Patterson v. Crenshaw, 110 Fla. 310, 148 Sou. 543, and the cases there cited, and also in the later case of Capital Finance Corporation v. Giles, et al., 110 Fla. 527, 149 Sou. 585. It was well settled that the holder of the tax certificate bought from and assigned by the proper official becomes ve…
-
Gibson v. Cent. Farmers Tr. Co., 116 Fla. 295 (Fla. 1934)…d assigned by the Clerk of the Circuit Court became invested with ownership of and right to foreclose the lien evidenced by the certificate for the face amount of the certificate. See Patterson v. Crenshaw, opinion filed May 24th, 1933, and reported 148 Sou. 543, and cases there cited. The fact that the property embraced in the description contained in the certificate was in the hands of a court receiver at the time the certificate was sold and assigned by the Clerk of the Circuit Court did not change the…
-
Washbish v. Ethyl Winifred Elvins, 114 Fla. 575 (Fla. 1934)…tificate issued at the tax sale for non-payment of taxes .by the owner, and that he may realize a profit on the transaction is immaterial. Capital Finance Corporation v. Giles, et al., 111 Fla. 527, 149 Sou. 585; Patterson v. Crenshaw, 148 Fla. 310, 148 Sou. 543. The Complainant owner of the legal title to the land has no equity by reason of the certificate having been assigned for less than the amount of the face of the certificate with interest, to enjoin the issue of a tax deed, since he is in default,…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence