Magruder v. . Randolph
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from a Justice’s Court heard at Spring Term, 1877, of Halieax Superior Court, before Buxton, J. The plaintiffs are wholesale dealers and manufacturers of boots and shoes in the City of Baltimore. The defendants are merchants in Halifax County, and bought a bill of goods of plaintiffs amounting to $526.25 on four months’ time, said bill as rendered being composed of twenty items.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a Justice’s Court heard at Spring Term, 1877, of Halieax Superior Court, before Buxton, J. The plaintiffs are wholesale dealers and manufacturers of boots and shoes in the City of Baltimore. The defendants are merchants in Halifax County, and bought a bill of goods of plaintiffs amounting to $526.25 on four months’ time, said bill as rendered being composed of twenty items. Upon default of payment, the plaintiffs “ split up ” the account, (but not the items thereof,) and instituted actions before a Justice of the Peace for the recovery of the various amounts.. The defendants…
1Opinion of the Court
Faircloth, J.‘
One of the defendants went into the plaintiffs’ store and purchased goods, going through the building from floor to floor, selecting 'and agreeing on the price of each item as he went, for example, “26 pair of men’s brogans, $1.75 per pair, $45.50 ” and so on through the "whole purchase.
• He went through the building continuously, not leaving it until his purchases were completed, and not until the bill was made and furnished to him, consisting of twenty items ■similar to the one above given, aggregating $526.25. The bill was marked “Terms, 4 months, interest charged after…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Caldwell, Ex'r v. . BeattySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
3Cited by4 opinions
- Jarrett v. . SelfSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- Copland v. Wireless Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Kearns v. . HeitmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Fort v. . PennySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898