Court Opinion

ID: 9811360
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:18:42.003532+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:13:09.782394
License: Public Domain

Clark, J.,
dissenting in paid : The trustee signed the following, which was duly recorded on the margin of the registry^ of the deed of trust:
“I, J. Gr. Merrimon, trustee, do hereby release and discharge from any and all liability in this deed of trust all of. that portion of said land conveyed by E. H. Wright and wife to J. R. Rich by deed dated November 24, 1891. Witness my hand and seal this 25th November, 1894. J. G-. Merrimoít, [Seal].
“Witness, J. J. Mackey.”
Concede that, technically, this was not authorized to be recorded as a release by The Code, Section 1271, still it *740was a memorandum in writing of a contract to convey made by Merrimon, as agent of the plaintiff, and the jury, on an issue submitted, find that Cobb, as the plaintiff’s agent and attorney, and with her authority, authorized and directed J. G. Merrimon to make the release. The release refers to the trust deed, on the margin of whose registration it was recorded, and to the deed of Wright and wife to J. R. ■ Rich, dated November 24, 1894, and is sufficient in form and substance to enable the court to decree specific performance, for there can be no sort of ambiguity as to the land embraced. But concede, even, that this authority from the plaintiff to Cobb were not sufficiently proved, the second' issue was, c‘After the execution of the release mentioned in the complaint by J. G. Merrimon, trustee, did the plaintiff ratify and confirm the act?” On this his Honor charged the jury upon her own testimony: “The plaintiff stated in her examination that she received the Ray contract, marked ‘A,’ that she received the payment of interest from said Ray,' and recognized him as her debtor, and afterwards brought suit upon the Ray contract, and these acts the Court charges you amount to a ratification, provided she accepted and retained said contract with full knowledge of all material facts.” These acts certainly would prove ratification, and the jury found that these were the facts. If there was not sufficient authority to Cobb shown to authorize Merrimon to make the release, this ratification supplied the defect. Rich bought in good faith upon a belief that Cobb had the authority as plaintiff’s agent, and her conduct thereafter fully ratified his authority, if defective. It would be against good conscience for him to suffer loss thereby, after such conduct on the part of the plaintiff.