Armour Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from 0carter, J., at September Term, 1911, of Pitt. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by Mr. (Thief Justice Clark.
1Opinion of the Court
ClaeK, 0. J.
Under a written contract with the defendant ás a del credere agent, the plaintiff shipped him certain fertilizers at prices specified in said contract, which the answer admits that he duly received. The defendant used a portion of these fertilizers himself, sold some to his tenants and a large portion to other persons. For nearly all that which he sold he has collected payment, except from his relatives, who are solvent. The fertilizers were analyzed by the Agricultural Department at the request of the defendant and a small deficiency in quality found, for which the defendant has…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Walker v. . VentersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- S. F. Bowser & Co. v. TarrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Pratt v. Chaffin.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Carson v. BuntingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hampton Guano Co. v. Hill Live-Stock Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Tomlinson & Co. v. MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Jones v. Union Guano Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Carter v. . McGillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Armour Fertilizer Works v. AikenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.