Metzler v. Harry Kaufman Co.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, on verdict, in an action for breach of a contract of sale.
Read the full summary
Hearing on an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, on verdict, in an action for breach of a contract of sale. The Court in the opinion stated the facts as follows: Harry Kaufman Company, a corporation organized and doing business as retail shoe merchants in the District of Columbia, sued Maurice W. Metzler, who was a manufacturer and jobber in shoes in the City of New York, trading under the name of Henry Maury Shoe Company, to recover damages for breach of a contract to deliver shoes ordered by plaintiff. The declaration alleges that on…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Shepard
Our statute of frauds provides that no contract for merchandise “for the price of $50 or upward shall be allowed to be good” unless some note or memorandum in writing of the said bargain be made and signed by the parties to be charged, or their agent thereunto lawfully authorized. Code, sec. 1119 [31 Stat. at L. 1368, chap. 85J]. Treating the two sheets of orders in this case as one memorandum signed by the soliciting salesman, Goetz, it is plain from the evidence, and the court rightly so charged, that it was not such a memorandum of sale as satisfied the requirement of the statute. It was…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- White v. . CorliesNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Edge Moor Bridge Works v. County of BristolMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Jenness v. Mount Hope Iron Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1864
- Royal Ins. v. BeattySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Prescott v. JonesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.