White v. Sanders
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Exceptions. Trover for a lot of goods. In 1848, the plaintiffs consigned the goods to one James Getchell, with private verbal orders to sell at retail and for cash only. Before the delivery of the goods to him, Getchell paid the plaintiffs $35 toward them, and promised $15 more, but did not pay it. He gave what was intended for security, by an absolute deed of a store.
Read the full summary
Exceptions. Trover for a lot of goods. In 1848, the plaintiffs consigned the goods to one James Getchell, with private verbal orders to sell at retail and for cash only. Before the delivery of the goods to him, Getchell paid the plaintiffs $35 toward them, and promised $15 more, but did not pay it. He gave what was intended for security, by an absolute deed of a store. After retailing fifteen dollars worth of the goods, he sold all the residue to the defendants, at the invoice prices, taking in payment fifty dollars in cash, a horse, wagon and harness, and the defendants’ notes at six and…
1Opinion of the Court
Tenney, J.,
orally.—The instruction as to the demand was correct.
The defendants’ counsel requested certain instructions. But the mere knowledge by the plaintiffs of the sale to the defendants, and their receipt from Getchell of money on account of the goods, would not necessarily be a ratification. The modi*190fication of requested instruction was rightfully made by the Judge. Exceptions overruled.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Pac. Vinegar & Pickle Works v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Mathias v. MathiasSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Wycoff v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Gair v. TuttleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri · 1892