Shoninger v. Peabody
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover for a piano sold; brought to the District Court of Waterbury, and tried to the court before Bradstreet, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiffs, and appeal by the defendant. The case is fully stated in the opinion. 1. The defendant bought and agreed to pay for this piano out of the commissions which he should earn from the agent. It is difficult to see how he can be compelled ’to perform any other contract than the one he has entered into.
Read the full summary
Action to recover for a piano sold; brought to the District Court of Waterbury, and tried to the court before Bradstreet, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiffs, and appeal by the defendant. The case is fully stated in the opinion. 1. The defendant bought and agreed to pay for this piano out of the commissions which he should earn from the agent. It is difficult to see how he can be compelled ’to perform any other contract than the one he has entered into. It may be admitted for the purposes of this case, that the agent had no power to agree to take anything in payment for…
1Opinion of the CourtLoomis, J.
The plaintiffs have been for many years dealers in musical instruments at New Haven, with a branch *46store at Waterbury, which from 1880 to October, 1886, was under the sole charge and management of one Henry It. Day, the general agent of the plaintiffs. Day was paid a regular salary and received in addition a commission on all sales made by him for the plaintiffs. While acting as such agent he sold from the store in Waterbury one of the plaintiffs’ pianos to the defendant for the agreed price of three hundred dollars, which was agreed to be paid for wholly by certain commissions that might…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Marsh v. PierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833
- President of the Peninsular Bank v. HanmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Beidman v. GoodellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Shepard v. PalmerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
- Smith v. PlummerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Gross v. CohenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Wilson v. San Francisco-Oakland & Terminal RailwaysCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Holman v. UpdikeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- O'Leary v. SkiltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Shinn v. Guyton & Harrington Mule Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1904
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.