Haseltine v. Dunbar
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Marathon County. The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion. The appeal is by the plaintiff from a judgment rendered in his favor upon the report of the referee as modified by the court. He contended, inter alia, that the acceptance was absolute. It is the contract of the acceptor, and should be construed most strongly against him.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Marathon County. The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion. The appeal is by the plaintiff from a judgment rendered in his favor upon the report of the referee as modified by the court. He contended, inter alia, that the acceptance was absolute. It is the contract of the acceptor, and should be construed most strongly against him. Sylvester v. Staples, 44 Me. 496; Corbett v. Ciarle, 45 Wis. 403. Had. he intended to limit his liability to the amount which might thereafter be found due from him to Young it was his duty to have expressed such limitation or…
1Opinion of the CourtOeton, J.
This action was brought upon the following order and acceptance:
“ Wausau, July 15, 1880.
“ C. F. Dunbar; Please pay to C. P. Haseltine & Co. seven hundred and thirty-two and 55-100 dollars, with interest at the rate of ten per cent, from the 1st day of January, 1880, and charge to my account.
[Signed] “Fbank W. Young.”
“ Accepted July 15,1880, payable according to a contract between F. W. Young and C. F. Dunbar, dated June 26, 1880, for " the purchase of a lot of logs on Eau Claire, *164marked on ends ‘ F. W. Y.’, one half payable when lumber is sawed and put in pile, and one half on 1st day of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Corbett v. ClarkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
3Cited by3 opinions
- International Finance Corp. v. Calvert Drug Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1924
- First Nat. Bank of Hoquiam, Wash. v. DeWittCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1934
- Taylor v. ParishWashington Supreme Court · 1915