Kornemann v. Monaghan
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne Circuit. This suit was brought by Otto Kornemann and Julius Jungblnth, against William Monaghan, to recover the price of certain goods sold by the former to the latter, through the means of an order taken by a traveling agent of the plaintiffs’, named H. C. Pearl. The trial was by jury, and the verdict and judgment were for the defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Campbell, Ch. J.
Plaintiffs forwarded a bill of goods to defendant, ordered by tbe latter from one Pearl, who did not mention to whom be intended to send tbe order. The goods were sent to defendant directly, accompanied by a bill in the name of the plaintiffs. A letter, sent at the same time directing the price to he remitted, is sworn not to have been received. Defendant gave evidence that after receiving the bill he paid the price to Pearl, but not till he had asked him if *37he had authority to receive it. There had never been any dealings between plaintiffs and defendant, but defendant had…
2Cited by17 opinions
- McKindly v. DunhamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- Lee v. Vaughan's Seed StoreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Reynolds v. Continental InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Bacon v. JohnsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Simon & Son v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.