Legal Opinion
North American Seed Co. v. Cedarburg Supply Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided March 14, 1945PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFritz, J.
The principal and crucial issue on this appeal is whether the written notations by the defendant’s manager, Harvey Zirtzlaff, in the blank spaces on a printed sales-slip form were sufficient to constitute, in view of the following provisions in sec. 121.04 (1), Stats., a valid and enforceable contract to sell certain seed of a value in excess of $50, to wit:
“A contract to sell or a sale of any goods or choses in action of the value of fifty dollars or upwards shall not be enforceable by action unless the buyer shall accept part of the goods or choses in action so contracted to be sold or…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Manufacturers Light & Heat Co. v. LampSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Western Metals Co v. Hartman Ingot Metal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1922
- Vitro Manufacturing Co. v. Standard Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. JohnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Carter, Macy Co. v. MatthewsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- R. H. Lindsay Co. v. GreagerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1953
- Erving Paper Mills v. Hudson-Sharp Machine Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1963
- Huggett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1945
- R. H. Lindsay Co. v. GreagerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1953