Watson v. Paschall
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Ardrich, J., Chesterfield, Action by E. T. Watson against Paschall & Co<. Defendants appeal. cites: The sendee is bound only by message delivered: 88 S. C. 498. Contract should be construed in the light of the surrounding circumstances: 68 S. C. 440. cite: Nothing in telegram. to show offer was declined: 83 S. C. 41. Party can not complain of a statement of his claim: 75 S. C. 19. Contracts should be construed by the words used: 19 S. C. 445.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chirr Justice Gary.
This is an action for commissions, alleged to be due the plaintiff as broker, for negotiating the sale of the timber on certain lands.
There was a former decision in this, case, which is reported in 83 S. C. 366.
On the 21st of February, 1905, the plaintiff and the defendants entered) into an agreement, the terms of which, are embodied in the following letter:
“Mr. J. R. Paschall, Charleston, W. Va.:
“I hereby agree with you to accept five thousand ($5,000) dollars commissions, for the sale of your timber to Holley & Stephenson, or…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Nash v. TowneSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- West v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Glover v. GasqueSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1903
3Cited by10 opinions
- Clark v. Southeastern Life Ins.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
- Cooper & Griffin, Inc. v. W. C. Cooke & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1922
- Remillard Brick Co. v. Remillard-Dandini Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Harper v. Weston Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1925
- Galloway v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.