Consumers Grocery & Meat Co. v. Comensky
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. William A. Taylor, Judge. (1) The alleged contract is so indefinite that there is no meeting of the minds and the contract is unenforcable. The contract specifically provided that it was against Comensky’s contract with Godchaux, and under Godchaux’s contract six hundred sacks were to be shipped each month commencing with January.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. William A. Taylor, Judge. (1) The alleged contract is so indefinite that there is no meeting of the minds and the contract is unenforcable. The contract specifically provided that it was against Comensky’s contract with Godchaux, and under Godchaux’s contract six hundred sacks were to be shipped each month commencing with January. The contract sued on does not specify which six hundred sacks were to be delivered, and is therefore so indefinite that the court cannot tell which six hundred sacks the parties had in mind. A contract must be so…
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, P. J.
Action for damages for an alleged breach of contract. Plaintiff charges that defendant sold to it 600 bags of Godchaux sugar, at $15 per bag or sack, to be delivered “on arrival f. o. b. cars, St. Louis.” Plaintiff avers that there is but one grade of Godchaux sugar. It also charges that defendant breached the contract and refused to deliver the sugar. That sugar advanced in price, and that plaintiff was damaged in the sum of $9,000, by reason of said breach of the contract. The contract, purports to be dated December 30, 1919, and reads:
‘ ‘ Sold to Consumers Guo. Co. 600 Bags of Godchaux…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. RichardsIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- United States v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Northrup v. Mississippi Valley InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Kersey v. GartonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- McCreery v. GreenMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kanavos v. Hancock Bank & Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Dockery v. DurhamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927