Curtiss v. Driggs
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, George W. Lubke, Judge. The testimony of the defendant establishes a sale on trial, and the law applicable to sales on trial is applicable to this case. The defendant testified: “The price agreed upon was twenty dollars apiece, or forty dollars for the two, if I' decided to keep them.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, George W. Lubke, Judge. The testimony of the defendant establishes a sale on trial, and the law applicable to sales on trial is applicable to this case. The defendant testified: “The price agreed upon was twenty dollars apiece, or forty dollars for the two, if I' decided to keep them.” Quin v. Stout, 31 Mo. 161; Prairie Farmer Go. v. Taylor, 69 111. 440; Kahn v. Flabwide, 50 Wis. 235; Hunt v. Wyman, 100 Mass. 198 ; Gibson v. Vail, 53 VT. 476. The failure to return the goods, within the time specified for trial, makes the sale absolute. Benj. on Sales…
1Opinion of the Court
Rombauee, J.,
delivered the opinibl of the court.
This is an action to recover forty-one dollars, the alleged contract price of two six light cluster fixtures, at' twenty dollars each, and eight pounds carbon, at twelve- and one-half cents per pound, alleged to have been sold-by the plaintiff to the defendant. The action was instituted before a justice of the peace, and outside of the-' plaintiff’s statement, which claims an absolute sale of. the lights, <©n October 8, and a sale of the carbon Octo-" ber 29, there are no pleadings.
The plaintiff, by his evidence, as well as by his statement,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Davidson v. BiermannMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Joy v. ManionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887