Mason v. Madson
Montana Supreme Court
1Dissent
I dissent. It seems to me that the words of the contract "all of 1929 lamb crop" together with the brand "M," when read in connection with the preliminary oral negotiations between the parties to explain the contract, would warrant a finding by the jury that what was meant was all of the 1929 lamb crop of the defendant. This being so, defendant fulfilled his contract by delivering his own full lamb crop regardless of the number, and plaintiff could not have been compelled to take the 52 head raised by another grower, even though of equal value and usefulness as those covered by his contract.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Stanfield v. ArnwineOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Rosenberg Bros. & Co. v. BealesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Mosby v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1916
- King v. RochesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892
- Russell v. CampCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.