Rowe v. Wright
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Calhoun Circuit. The action was replevin. Defendant claimed the property under an instrument in the following form: “ James G-. Wright, bought of Charles G. Rowe; 1862, March 24, 1 frame building, . . . $300 1 marble slab, (&c., &c.) Received payment, $419 Charles G. Rowe.”
Read the full summary
Error to Calhoun Circuit. The action was replevin. Defendant claimed the property under an instrument in the following form: “ James G-. Wright, bought of Charles G. Rowe; 1862, March 24, 1 frame building, . . . $300 1 marble slab, (&c., &c.) Received payment, $419 Charles G. Rowe.” The plaintiff gave evidence tending to show that this instrument was executed while he was in possession of the property, and upon the agreement and express understanding that he should keep possession of the property until the defendant should assume three certain debts owing by the plaintiff’s father, amounting…
1Opinion of the Court
Christiancy J.:
We think the Court below erred in holding the written instrument in question conclusive of the ternas and conditions of the sale, and in excluding from the jury the verbal evidence tending to show that the property was not to be delivered till paid for in the manner verbally agreed upon at the time of the sale.
The written instrument was rather a bill of parcels than a bill of sale — little if anything more in substance than a receipt for the price, and subject to the same rules as to the admission of verbal evidence to vary, contradict or explain it. It does not of itself…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tobey v. BarberNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Dunn v. HewittNew York Supreme Court · 1846
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sirrine v. BriggsMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Pratt v. CastleMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- R. M. Davis Photo Stock Co. v. Photo Jewelry Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1909
- Brewster v. PotruffMichigan Supreme Court · 1884