Norris v. Clark
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Otter Tail county to recover the price of brick sold to the defendant, under the writing set out in the opinion. The defendant in his answer pleaded (among other things) a counterclaim for commission on brick sold by plaintiff in Fergus Falls.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Otter Tail county to recover the price of brick sold to the defendant, under the writing set out in the opinion. The defendant in his answer pleaded (among other things) a counterclaim for commission on brick sold by plaintiff in Fergus Falls. On the trial, before Collins, J., and a jury, one Stanford, called as a witness by defendant, was asked whether or not, in the season of 1883, subsequent to July 31, he purchased brick of plaintiff to be delivered in Fergus Falls, which question was on plaintiff’s objection excluded. The court…
1Opinion of the Court
Gtleillan, 0. J.
This was the contract between the parties: “This is to state that B. A. Clark is to have the sale of my brick in Fergus Falls during the season of 1883, and that I am to deliver them on board the cars at Fergus Falls at nine (9) dollars per M.; settlement to be made monthly.” It does not show any consideration; but as, on the trial, the parties and the court below treated it apparently as valid, we shall assume it to be valid, and that a sufficient consideration was shown. A construction of it is called for in respect to whether it is an agreement that defendant should have…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Austin v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
3Cited by6 opinions
- Knatvold v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
- Dolph v. Troy Laundry Machinery Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1886
- Sutton v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- Albright v. KalbitzerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1945
- Loud v. SolomonMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.