Clifton v. Ross
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court. Charles W. Smith, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The facts in this case are as follows: The appellee, Ross, who is a farmer, came to appellant, Clifton, who has a blacksmith and repair shop in the town of Camden, and consulted him about the purchase of a mill with which to grind up cotton seed. Clifton was not a dealer in mills and machines, but he repaired them, and had in his shop a catalogue of the N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court. Charles W. Smith, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The facts in this case are as follows: The appellee, Ross, who is a farmer, came to appellant, Clifton, who has a blacksmith and repair shop in the town of Camden, and consulted him about the purchase of a mill with which to grind up cotton seed. Clifton was not a dealer in mills and machines, but he repaired them, and had in his shop a catalogue of the N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company. He and Ross looked through this catalogue, and finally selected a mill, called the “Dipse Huller and Grinder,” that they…
1Opinion of the Court
Riddick, J.,
(after stating the facts). The question for us to determine is whether the circuit court erred in instructing the jury that if no price was agreed upon for the mill, they must find for defendant. To constitute a sale it is not necessary that the parties agree on a price, for, if no price is fixed by the parties, the law implies that it shall be what the thing sold is reasonably worth. This is said to be elementary law. Note to Bennett’s Ed. Benjamin-on Sales, 90; Taft v. Travis, 136 Mass. 95.
But i£ the testimony of Clifton is true, he did not sell the mill to Ross, but purchased…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bibb v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Taft v. TravisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pine Bluff Heading Co. v. BockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924