Louisville Asphalt Varnish Co. v. Lorick
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Pressley, J., Richland, The opinion fully states the case.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McIver.
This was an action to recover the sum of eightv-three dollars and five cents, the price of certain varnish and paint alleged to have been sold by plaintiff to defendants. The defence ivas a general denial. At the trial the plaintiff offered testimony tending to show that on the 16th October, 1885, one of its travelling salesmen, Hutchinson by name, took from Moore, a clerk of defendants, who, it was admitted, had authority to give the order, a verbal order for the articles specified in the account sued on, which Hutchinson…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Insurance Co. v. DutcherSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Townsend v. HargravesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Drury v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1882
3Cited by15 opinions
- Huffine v. McCampbellTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. EgertonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1923
- Woodruff Oil & Fertilizer Co. v. Portsmouth Cotton Oil Refining Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1917
- Harby v. WilsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1916
- Talkington v. Anchor Gasoline Corp.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1993
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.