Cheney Bigelow Wire Works v. Sorrell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, C. J.
This is an action to recover the price of a “counter rail.” The plaintiff put in evidence a postal card signed by the defendants, of which the substance is as follows: “ Please send us pice of counter screen like draft.” Upon this card was a draft of a counter screen with the measurements thereof. The court rightly ruled that this order was unmeaning and unintelligible, and that it could not be construed as an order for a piece of counter railing. It presents a case of incurable uncertainty; and the court properly refused to submit it to the jury to determine whether the letters “ pice ”…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Brighton Packing Co. v. Butchers' Slaughtering & Melting Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Elks v. . Insurance CoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Wellington v. RuggMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Tanning Co. v. . Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.