Rees v. Pellow
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Michigan. This was an action brought by the defendant in error, Thomas Pellow, against William D. Rees, the plaintiff in error, to recover commissions claimed to have been earned under an option contract for bringing about the sale of 9,000 shares of stock owned by the said Rees. There was also a count upon a quantum meruit.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Michigan. This was an action brought by the defendant in error, Thomas Pellow, against William D. Rees, the plaintiff in error, to recover commissions claimed to have been earned under an option contract for bringing about the sale of 9,000 shares of stock owned by the said Rees. There was also a count upon a quantum meruit. Upon the trial of the cause the court instructed the jury to find for the defendant upon the count in contract, upon the ground that the plaintiff, Pellow, had not made the final sale of said…
1Opinion of the CourtLurton, Circuit Judge
The agreement between Rees and Pellow, evidenced by the letter of August 5, 1898, has a double aspect, and must be construed accordingly: First, it was an option to join Mitchell, and sell to Pellow at a fixed price; second, this option was coupled with an agency to sell, in conjunction with Mitchell, to others at the same price.
So far as it was an option to Pellow himself, it was revocable at any time before acceptance. Stitt v. Huidekopers, 17 Wall. 384-394. There is no pretense that Pellow ever accepted the offer, or even had any purpose to do so. This aspect of the case may, therefore, be…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Sibbald v. . the Bethlehem Iron CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Wylie v. . Marine National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- McGavock v. WoodliefSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- Kock v. EmmerlingSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
- Stitt v. HuidekopersSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hollweg v. Schaefer Brokerage Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
- Barney v. Yazoo Delta Land Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Oldfield v. Chevrolet Motor Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- Schnerb v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- Auerbach v. Internationale Wolfram Lampen Aktien GesellschaftDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1910
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.