Anderson & Co. v. Cahill
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Fremont District Gourt. The petition states that in November, 1880, the defendant sold the plaintiff 3,000 bushels of shelled corn, for which the plaintiff agreed to pay 26-} cents per bushel, and that the corn was to be delivered in January, 1881. The petition further states that the plaintiff paid the defendant, at different times subsequent to the time the contract was entered into, the sum of $451. The contract was in writing, and the petition stated that the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Fremont District Gourt. The petition states that in November, 1880, the defendant sold the plaintiff 3,000 bushels of shelled corn, for which the plaintiff agreed to pay 26-} cents per bushel, and that the corn was to be delivered in January, 1881. The petition further states that the plaintiff paid the defendant, at different times subsequent to the time the contract was entered into, the sum of $451. The contract was in writing, and the petition stated that the time for the delivery of the corn was extended by parol; that plaintiff had demanded the corn, and defendant refused to…
1Opinion of the CourtSeevers, J.
i. practice : evidence to diet. I. N either party excepted to the instructions of the court, and therein the court said to the jury that “ defendant admits that he received $351 on the contract, but denies that he received more than this. In settling the account, you must allow the. plaintiff at least that amount.” The court further instructed the jury in relation to the refusal of the plaintiff to receive the corn, and left it to the jury to say whether the contract had been rescinded by the acts and conduct of the plaintiff. The jury must have found that the contract had not been rescinded,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Farrell v. SolarySupreme Court of Florida · 1901
- Sutton v. GrahamMississippi Supreme Court · 1902