Jones Cotton Co. v. Snead
Supreme Court of Alabama
Assumpsit. Appeal from Madison Law and Equity Court. Heard before 1-Ion. Tancred Betts. Action by J. H. Snead and others against the Jones Cotton Company for the price of cotton sold. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. The agreement set out is void and the court cannot give it effect. — Robinson v. Bulloch, 58 Ala. 621; Boykin v. Bank of Mobile, 72 Ala. 269. The contract cannot be said to be ambiguous so as to be made certain by evidence aliunde. — 4 Ene.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Appeal from Madison Law and Equity Court. Heard before 1-Ion. Tancred Betts. Action by J. H. Snead and others against the Jones Cotton Company for the price of cotton sold. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. The agreement set out is void and the court cannot give it effect. — Robinson v. Bulloch, 58 Ala. 621; Boykin v. Bank of Mobile, 72 Ala. 269. The contract cannot be said to be ambiguous so as to be made certain by evidence aliunde. — 4 Ene. P. & P. 918. The price is not fixed by the contract, and hence, it is void for that reason. — Pullium v. ScMmpf, 109 Ala. 182.…
1Opinion of the CourtMayfield, J.
Appellant received from appellees, through its agent, Baugh, 306 bales of cotton. The sum of $12,440 was advanced on the delivery of the cotton. The day after the last lot was delivered, the appellant, through its agent, delivered to appellees the following-written statement:
Boaz, Ala., December 19th, 1907.
Reed. John H. Snead & McKleskey for shipment on account the following No. bales of cotton, viz.:
Nov. 14-th, 145 B/ advance $6,240.00
Dec. 1st, 81 “ “ 3,245.00
“ 11th, 54 “ “ 2,160.00
“ 18th, 26 “ “ 800.00
This cotton to be settled for at any time Snead & Mc-Kleskey may elect by giving notice…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gravlee v. LamkinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- G. B. Shaw & Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891
- McConnell v. HughesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
- Ames v. QuimbySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Smith v. Southern Express Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
3Cited by6 opinions
- Raisler Sprinkler Co. v. Automatic Sprinkler Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Delaware · 1934
- Southern Ry. Co. v. HarrisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- American Ry. Express Co. v. HendersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Birmingham Water Works Co. v. BaileyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1912
- Nearhos v. KeithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.