Michigan Reports (Volume 38); Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of Michigan (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1880. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... J. W. & 0. C. Ransom (on brief) for plaintiff in error. Grove & Thompson and T. B. Church (on brief) for defendant in error. Marston, J. Defendant in error sought to recover in an action of assumpsit upon the following instrument: "grand Rapids, Sept. 14, 1874. Messrs. Isaac Woodruff & Co., General agents of the Pharos Lightning Rod Company, Grand Rapids, Mich.-- You will please send me galvanized lightning rods for my house within sixty days, for which I will give you thirty-five cents per foot, due when work is completed. H. Weiden. Ten per cent. discount to be given on whole amount." Plaintiff proved that under this order he had delivered 206 feet of lightning rod. Defendant claiming that this written instrument did not constitute a complete binding contract between the parties, offered to prove the conversation between plaintiff's agent and defendant at the time this order was given; that defendant reserved the right to countermand the order at any time within the sixty days; that he did in fact within that time, and before any of the rod was delivered, actually countermand the order; and he farther offered to prove that at the time the order was given the number of feet of rod to be delivered was agreed upon. This evidence was all objected to and excluded, and plaintiff recovered judgment for the amount claimed. I. This written order did not constitute such a written contract between the parties as would exclude parol evidence, or prevent the defendant from showing any further agreement entered into between the parties at the time the order was given, and not embraced therein. Richards v. Fuller, 37 Mich., 161; Phelps v. Whitaker, id., 72, and cases there cited. II. This instrument was but a mere order. Woodruff was not bound by it in any way to deliver any...

R705

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles7050
Mobicred@R66pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1880. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... J. W. & 0. C. Ransom (on brief) for plaintiff in error. Grove & Thompson and T. B. Church (on brief) for defendant in error. Marston, J. Defendant in error sought to recover in an action of assumpsit upon the following instrument: "grand Rapids, Sept. 14, 1874. Messrs. Isaac Woodruff & Co., General agents of the Pharos Lightning Rod Company, Grand Rapids, Mich.-- You will please send me galvanized lightning rods for my house within sixty days, for which I will give you thirty-five cents per foot, due when work is completed. H. Weiden. Ten per cent. discount to be given on whole amount." Plaintiff proved that under this order he had delivered 206 feet of lightning rod. Defendant claiming that this written instrument did not constitute a complete binding contract between the parties, offered to prove the conversation between plaintiff's agent and defendant at the time this order was given; that defendant reserved the right to countermand the order at any time within the sixty days; that he did in fact within that time, and before any of the rod was delivered, actually countermand the order; and he farther offered to prove that at the time the order was given the number of feet of rod to be delivered was agreed upon. This evidence was all objected to and excluded, and plaintiff recovered judgment for the amount claimed. I. This written order did not constitute such a written contract between the parties as would exclude parol evidence, or prevent the defendant from showing any further agreement entered into between the parties at the time the order was given, and not embraced therein. Richards v. Fuller, 37 Mich., 161; Phelps v. Whitaker, id., 72, and cases there cited. II. This instrument was but a mere order. Woodruff was not bound by it in any way to deliver any...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 16mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

308

ISBN-13

978-1-154-32600-0

Barcode

9781154326000

Categories

LSN

1-154-32600-4



Trending On Loot