Western Mill & Lumber Co. v. Blanchard
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. Persons who contract on a subject-matter concerning which a known usage prevails, by implication incorporate it in their agreement, if nothing is said to the contrary.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. Persons who contract on a subject-matter concerning which a known usage prevails, by implication incorporate it in their agreement, if nothing is said to the contrary. Parsons on Contracts (7th ed.), pp. 666-7; Wait’s Actions and Defenses, vol. 1, p. 128; Robinson v. United States, 13 Wall. 363. A person who deals in a particular market must be taken to deal according to the known, general and uniform usage or custom of that market. Bailey v. Bens-ley, 87 Ill. 556; Lonergan v. Stewart, 55 Ill. 44.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Soott, J.
Appellees, who were plaintiffs below, brought suit to recover the contract price for certain saw-logs sold by them to appellant, which were lost while being towed from the place of purchase to the company’s mill. The controversy was as to which party assumed the risk of tow-age; whether’, by the contract made, the logs were delivered at the place where purchased, or whether they were to have been delivered by appellees at the mill aforesaid.
The contract was made upon the part of appellant through one Yilley, its special agent for that purpose.…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Noland v. CromwellSupreme Court of Virginia · 1814
- In re FriedrichU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington · 1892
- Maynard v. SheinWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1919
- Brown v. GillettWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Depew v. HowardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1810
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.