Legal Opinion

Hooven & Allison Co. v. Wirtz

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1906PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal from District Court, Benson county; Cowan, J. Action by the Hooven & Allison Company against A. J. Wirtz and C. H. Wirtz, partners as Wirtz Bros. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. Mere written orders for goods which do not contain the terms of a complete contract will not exclude parol evidence of the contract actually made.

Read the full summary

Appeal from District Court, Benson county; Cowan, J. Action by the Hooven & Allison Company against A. J. Wirtz and C. H. Wirtz, partners as Wirtz Bros. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. Mere written orders for goods which do not contain the terms of a complete contract will not exclude parol evidence of the contract actually made. Tufts v. Hunter, 65 N. W. 922; Aultman Miller & Co. v. Clifford, 56 N. W. 593; Head et al. v. Miller, 48 N. W. 195; Boynton Furnace Co. v. Clark et al., 44 N. W. 121; Palmer et al. v. Roath et al., 49 N. W. 590; Nat. Cash Register Co. v. Pfister et al., 58…

1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover upon a promissory note for $9,850, executed by the defendants on July 20, 1904, and due 100 days thereafter. The defendants’ answer admits the execution of the note and that it is not paid. The answer after alleging, “that the only consideration for the note sued on herein, was certain binding twine of plaintiff’s manufacture, which was ordered and purchased of plaintiff by defendants,” alleges by way of defense and counterclaim in substance (1) that the twine so ordered and purchased was manufactured by plaintiff and was sold by it as its own…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kellogg Bridge Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Hoe v. . SanbornNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  3. Dowagiac Manufacturing Co. v. MahonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Merriam v. FieldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869
  5. Northwestern Cordage Co. v. RiceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  2. Bekkevold v. PottsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  3. Minneapolis Steel & MacHinery Co. v. Casey Land AgencyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Winton Motor Carriage Co. v. BlombergWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Kramer v. K. O. Lee & Son Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1931

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API