Trainer v. Morison
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
ON REPORT. Assumpsit on the following account: All hills must be paid by Chech; to our order, or in current iunis at our office. [Red ink. j TERMS CASH. BOSTON, OCT. 9th, 1383. Mess. JohN Moris on & Co., Bought of CHAS. W. TRAINER & CO. Manufacturers and Dealers in LUBRICATING, PARRAFINE AND WOOL OILS, 148 & 150 Oliver and 93 Purchase Streets. The evidence shows that Richardson was not authorized by principal to receive payment.
Read the full summary
ON REPORT. Assumpsit on the following account: All hills must be paid by Chech; to our order, or in current iunis at our office. [Red ink. j TERMS CASH. BOSTON, OCT. 9th, 1383. Mess. JohN Moris on & Co., Bought of CHAS. W. TRAINER & CO. Manufacturers and Dealers in LUBRICATING, PARRAFINE AND WOOL OILS, 148 & 150 Oliver and 93 Purchase Streets. The evidence shows that Richardson was not authorized by principal to receive payment. Richardson, selling by sample, and not intrusted with the possession of goods, not impliedly authorized to receive payment. An agent employed to make a contract is…
1Opinion of the CourtHaskell, J.
Assumpsit to recover the price for merchandize sold. Defense, payment to the plaintiff’s agent.
*163The plaintiff employed an agent to " sell ” 3ns goods " by sample.” The agent took an order from the defendants for oil, and directed the same forwarded to them, saying that it would arrive by next boat, and that "he came round once a month,” when the defendants engaged to pay him. The goods were delivered as agreed, accompanied by a bill, with the words, "all bills must be-paid by check to our order, or in current funds at onr office,” printed in red at the top. In two weeks after the delivery of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Higgins v. . MooreNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Goodenow v. TylerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- George D. Putnam & Co. v. French & MooreSupreme Court of Vermont · 1881
- Kinsman v. KershawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by7 opinions
- Goldstein v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust National BankSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1972
- Simon & Son v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Boylan v. WorkmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Hardy v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Roof v. Morrisson, Plummer & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.