Story Case

The Baily Mills Company inserted the following advertisement in the county newspaper:

"In order to get our name before the people, we are offering to the farmers of Fayette County, seed corn at the nominal price of 25c a bushel.

The Baily Mills Co".

Morgan Lindsey, a farmer, who lived just over the Fayette County line in Ross County, saw the advertisement and ordered 50 bushels of the corn. The mills company refused to deliver it, claiming that the offer had not been made to him. Lindsey claimed that the offer was made to whomever should read the paper. Which party should win the case when Lindsey sued for breach of contract?

Ruling Court Case. Ryer Vs. Stockwell, Volume 14 California Reports, Page 134; Volume 73 American Decisions, Page 634

On the morning of June 18, 1856, Stockwell's house in the city of Stockton was burned. He suspected that it was the act of an incendiary. Accordingly, he published in a newspaper the offer of a reward for any information which would lead to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons who did the act. Ryer saw and read the offer and immediately made plans to discover the information necessary to lead to the arrest and conviction of the guilty party. After some efforts he did procure evidence which resulted in the arrest and conviction of the person who had set fire to the house, but Stockwell, although requested, refused to pay the offered reward to Ryer. Thereupon, Ryer sued him for the money.

The defense of Stockwell consisted in the fact that he had never made any offer to Ryer.

Decision

An offer which is published generally, is an offer to any and every one who has read or knows of the existence of the same; no restrictions exist. Ryer read the offer in a newspaper, and in reliance thereon, performed all the conditions necessary to entitle him to the reward. This was an acceptance on his part, and, thereupon, Stockwell became legally bound to pay to him the offered reward. Had Stockwell chosen, he could have originally restricted his offer.

Mr. Justice Baldwin, in the opinion of the Court quoted from a Massachusetts case, as governing this case: "There is now no question of the correctness of the legal principle on which this action is founded. The offer of a reward for the detection of an offender, the recovery of property, and the like, is an offer or proposal on the part of the person making it, to all persons, which any one, capable of performing the service, may accept at any time before it is revoked, and perform the service; and such offer on one side, and acceptance and performance of the service on the other, is a valid contract, made on good consideration, which the law will enforce".

Judgment, therefore, was given for Ryer in this action.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

Offers of rewards for the capture and return of criminals are examples of general offers. Any one who performs the act desired, in reliance upon the offer, is entitled to the reward. In the Story Case, however, the offer was not to the whole public, but to the public of Fayette County. Any resident of the county was entitled to accept the offer, but it did not extend to any one living out of the boundary. Consequently, the acceptance of Lindsey was of no effect. Judgment should be given for the Baily Mills Company.