Elliott v. Walker
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. The defendants in error were the plaintiffs below.
Read the full summary
Writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. The defendants in error were the plaintiffs below. In these two causes, which depended upon- the same fact's and principles, a case was stated -for the opinion of the court below, the substance of which was as follows: ■ *' ' On the 14th of March,, 1820, the defendants consigned certain merchandize to John Wilson, the plaintiffs’ intestate, as supercargo of the schooner Baltimore, to be sold at Port-au-Prince, for account and risk of the. consignors} with general discretionary powers on the subject. 'Wilson sold the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered hy
Rogers, J.
The payment of the-balance of an account by a factor or commission merchant, to his principal, after the sales made,- and for the purpose of closing the aecounts between the parties, is an assumption of outstanding debts. And this is the principle of the case of Oakley v. Renshaw, 4 Cow. 205.
After the final settlement, the principal has the-best grounds, to suppose that the agent has been actually paid, or that he is content to take upon himself the responsibility of the purchaser. Where there is nothing in the transaction to rebut the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Clark v. PhelpsNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- D'Arcy v. LyleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
3Cited by9 opinions
- Dorothy Johnson v. Memphis Light Gas & Water Div.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
- Barrett v. OrmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
- Toevs v. MilyardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
- Denney v. WheelwrightMississippi Supreme Court · 1883
- United States v. Romero-LeonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.