Tascott v. Rosenthal
Appellate Court of Illinois
Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. Mason B. Loomis, Judge, presiding. Assumpsit for the price of certain brushes alleged to have been sold by appellees to appellants. Tascott and Sons, doing business in Chicago, gave appellees, Rosenthal & Bro., brush manufacturers in Hew York City, an order in writing as follows: Office of J. B. Tascott & Sons, Manufacturers, etc. Chicago, Nov. 20, 1880. Maurace Rosenthal, of Rosenthal Bros.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. Mason B. Loomis, Judge, presiding. Assumpsit for the price of certain brushes alleged to have been sold by appellees to appellants. Tascott and Sons, doing business in Chicago, gave appellees, Rosenthal & Bro., brush manufacturers in Hew York City, an order in writing as follows: Office of J. B. Tascott & Sons, Manufacturers, etc. Chicago, Nov. 20, 1880. Maurace Rosenthal, of Rosenthal Bros. Dear Sir: Please enter for us the following, subject to the following conditions, to wit: Prices to be as low as any Chicago buyer has rec’d from you.…
1Opinion of the Court
Wilson P. J.
We have reached the conclusion that this judgment must be reversed. The order for the brushes expressly provided that they were not to be shipped before Feb. 20th-Appellees, in contravention of the order, shipped them February 12th, eight days before the time specified. By the acceptance of the order and appellees undertaking to act under it, it became a contract between the parties for the purchase of goods to be delivered by the seller at a future designated time. At law, time is of the essence of such a contract, and performance by the seller according to its terms, unless…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hill v. School District No. 2Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1840
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sunshine Cloak & Suit Co. v. Roquette Bros.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Emerson Shoe Co. v. NeelyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1925