Sorrel v. Brewster
Michigan Supreme Court
Motion for a new trial, reserved from Wayne Circuit Court. Assumpsit by Sorrel against Brewster. The declaration contain a special count, on a note executed by one Raitte, in the name of defendant, and the common counts for goods sold and delivered.
Read the full summary
Motion for a new trial, reserved from Wayne Circuit Court. Assumpsit by Sorrel against Brewster. The declaration contain a special count, on a note executed by one Raitte, in the name of defendant, and the common counts for goods sold and delivered. On the trial the following letters were given in evidence, to prove the agency of Raitte: “Lithopolis, April 9lh, 1844. Mr. Brewster : Sir — I hare to say to you that I have on hand a lot of five to eight thousand fur skins, which I am anxious to sell. If you are in the fur market, you will do well to come and buy my furs. They will run two-thuds…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court,
Gueen, J.
The first inquiry which naturally arises in this case, is, what was the nature and extent of Raitte’s agency, in purchasing the furs ip question, as between Brewster, his principal, and the plaintiff? If we are able to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion upon this question, there will be no serious difficulty in determining the rights of the parties involved in this suit.
The only evidence of Raitte’s power to act as the agent of Brewster, is found in the letters of Brewster, dated the 24th of April, 1844, one of which is addressed to the plaintiff, and the other to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Parsons v. CareySupreme Court of Iowa · 1870