Rogers v. Rogers & Brother
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
CONTRACT for the breach of an agreement to sell goods. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Gardner, J., who reported the case for the determination of this court, in substance as follows: The plaintiffs introduced evidence tending to show that, on or about July 8, 1879, the defendant, a manufacturing corporation located in Connecticut, by its agent, C. A. Hamilton, orally agreed to sell and deliver to the plaintiffs in Boston, from time to time, as ordered by…
Read the full summary
CONTRACT for the breach of an agreement to sell goods. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Gardner, J., who reported the case for the determination of this court, in substance as follows: The plaintiffs introduced evidence tending to show that, on or about July 8, 1879, the defendant, a manufacturing corporation located in Connecticut, by its agent, C. A. Hamilton, orally agreed to sell and deliver to the plaintiffs in Boston, from time to time, as ordered by them, such silver-plated ware, namely, spoons and forks, as they might need in their business, and order during the…
1Opinion of the CourtField, J.
We infer from the report, that the court found that the contract was not merely an offer by the defendant to sell, which would have been revocable at any time, except so far as it had been accepted by the plaintiffs in giving orders, and would thus be a contract only to the extent of those orders; but that it was a contract whereby the plaintiffs agreed to buy, and the defendant agreed to sell, such of the goods dealt in by the defendant as the plaintiffs needed in their trade during the time specified. See Dickinson v. Dodds, 2 Ch. D. 463. The plaintiffs were bound in law to pay for the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Williams v. GoochCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1861
- Stewart Howell v. . KeteltasNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Cooke v. MurphyIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- Moore v. Detroit Locomotive WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Lawrence v. DaveySupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
3Cited by36 opinions
- Cochran v. Quest Software, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2003
- Parrot v. Mexican Central Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Linz v. SchuckCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1907
- King v. Duluth, Missabe & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Rowe v. Inhabitants of PeabodyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.