Case Name: Kerlin Bros. v. City of Toledo
Court: Lucas County Circuit Court
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1909-06
Citations: 19 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 120
Docket Number: 
Parties: Kerlin Bros. v. City of Toledo.
Judges: Kinkade, J.; Parker, J., and Wildman, J., concur.
Reporter: Ohio Circuit Court Reports (new series)
Volume: 19
Pages: 120–121

Head Matter:
SALES1BY A MUNICIPALITY.
Circuit Court of Lucas County.
Kerlin Bros. v. City of Toledo.
Decided, June, 1909.
Municipal Corporations — Basis of Dealings where Properly is Sold 0y the City.
City officers can not bind tlic municipality as to title or quantity of property offered for sale, and a purchaser of property so offered can not maintain an action for the value of property not delivered.
Marshall & Fraser, for plaintiff in error.
Charles S. Northup, contra.
Kinkade, J.; Parker, J., and Wildman, J., concur.

Opinion:
In this cas» Judge Barber directed a verdict in favor of the city at the close of the testimony. We think the petition does not state a cause of action. No fraud or deceit is charged, nor is it stated that the plaintiff did not know the quantity of pipe that the city had for sale. The city had power to sell the pipe it owned, but no authority to sell property it did not own. The plaintiff having paid the amount of the bid to the city, might under certain conditions have rescinded the contract, but we think the plaintiff did not have the right to treat the contract as if made by an individual, and sue for the value of the property not delivered. The city officials can not bind the city as to title or quantity. The judgment of the court of common pleas will be affirmed.