Toombs v. Stockwell
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Clinton; Davis, J., presiding. Assumpsit by Theodore Toombs against A. U. Stock-well upon a guaranty of payment for goods sold. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error. Plaintiff brought suit upon the following paper: “St. Johns, July 11th, 1900. “ The Ideal Flatiron Company.
Read the full summary
Error to Clinton; Davis, J., presiding. Assumpsit by Theodore Toombs against A. U. Stock-well upon a guaranty of payment for goods sold. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error. Plaintiff brought suit upon the following paper: “St. Johns, July 11th, 1900. “ The Ideal Flatiron Company. “ Gentlemen: Please ship to my address one dozen Ideal flatirons, at $36 per dozen, as per agreement on back of this order; to be fully settled for within ten days from date. “Town, St. Johns. ' County, Clinton. “State, Michigan. R. R. Station, D. & M. “ Mrs. L. B.…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). We think the court was in error. The paper sued upon was a specific order for certain goods, specifically stated that they were to be settled for within 10 days from date, and its payment guaranteed by defendant. Even if the contract of agency had been attached to the paper, the terms of the guaranteed order must control as to the time. Inasmuch as this was the sole question upon which the case was. decided, it is the only one which we need to determine. We may, however, with propriety refer to one other point raised by the defense, viz., that there is no averment…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Toombs v. StockwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1902