Dickinson v. Gay
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, containing several counts, some of which set forth that the defendants were indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $1739.26, for the balance due for the price of goods sold by* them for him, and others that they were indebted in the like sum for the balance due for goods sold and delivered by him to them.
Read the full summary
Contract, containing several counts, some of which set forth that the defendants were indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $1739.26, for the balance due for the price of goods sold by* them for him, and others that they were indebted in the like sum for the balance due for goods sold and delivered by him to them. At the trial in this court, before Chapman, J., many letters between the parties were introduced which, as the judge ruled, constituted a contract of agency between the parties, by which the defendants were to sell the goods for the plaintiff as his agents. The letters, however,…
1Opinion of the CourtChapman, J.
The court are of opinion that, by a fair construction of the written correspondence between the parties, the defendants were not purchasers of the goods in question, but were authorized by the plaintiff to sell them as his agents to Biggies & Co. But as they were not authorized to sell on credit, they would, upon the sale, become responsible to the plaintiff for the price.
The sale was by sample. On such a sale it is admitted that the law implies a warranty that the bulk of the goods shall be equal in quality to the sample. See Bradford v. Manly, 13 Mass. 139. The jury have found that these…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wheeler v. . NewbouldNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Sands & Crump v. Taylor & LovettNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Bradford v. ManlyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Goodenow v. TylerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Snowden v. WarderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1831
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.