Mabray v. Kelly-Goodfellow Shoe Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit■ Court. — Hon. D. D. Fisher, Judge. It is immaterial in this case as to what was the custom in Texas, as to the authority of traveling salesmen to bind their employers in a contract to sell goods. The contract was to have been executed in St. Louis, and the law of the place of performance of the contract is the law to govern in this case. Kerwin v. Doran, 29 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit■ Court. — Hon. D. D. Fisher, Judge. It is immaterial in this case as to what was the custom in Texas, as to the authority of traveling salesmen to bind their employers in a contract to sell goods. The contract was to have been executed in St. Louis, and the law of the place of performance of the contract is the law to govern in this case. Kerwin v. Doran, 29 Mo. App. 397; Finch v. Mansfield, 97 Mass. 89. Price could not have made an absolute sale, nor a binding contract to sell, as he did not have the goods in his possession. McKinley v. Dunham, 55 Wis.…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
In May, 1895, Perry, Oldham & Company were merchants doing business at McKinney, Texas, and the firm of Mabray, Oldham & Company were doing a mercantile business at Bonham, Texas. In that month Thomas S. Price was a traveling salesman for the Kelly-G-oodfellow Shoe Company in that part of the state of Texas embracing McKinney and Bonham, and on the fifteenth day of May, 1895, he called upon Mabray, a member of both firms, at his place of business at Bonham, with ten or fifteen samples of shoes, with a view of selling the firm shoes for Kelly-G-oodfellow Shoe Company; Mabray selected a shoe…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Edwards v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Franklin v. Globe Mutual Life Ins.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Stone v. PerrySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1872
- Seed v. LordSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1876
- Sandler v. BresnahamMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Lexington ex rel. Menefee v. Commercial BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Keys v. Estate of KeysSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- City of Joplin ex rel. Carthage Dimension & Flag Stone Co. v. HollingsheadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- Smith v. DroubayUtah Supreme Court · 1899
- Hill v. Bank of SenecaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.