Frick & Co. v. C. G. Larned & Co.
Supreme Court of Kansas
M’ror from, Sumner District Court. Fjrick & Company brought au action against C. G. Darned & Co. to recover the sum of $1,741.59. The grounds for recovery, as stated in their petition, are as follows: “ Eirst, that the plaintiff isa corporation .created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Pennsylvania, and doing business in the state of Kansas as well as other states, in the manufacture and sale of threshing machines, engines, and separators; that on…
Read the full summary
M’ror from, Sumner District Court. Fjrick & Company brought au action against C. G. Darned & Co. to recover the sum of $1,741.59. The grounds for recovery, as stated in their petition, are as follows: “ Eirst, that the plaintiff isa corporation .created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Pennsylvania, and doing business in the state of Kansas as well as other states, in the manufacture and sale of threshing machines, engines, and separators; that on the 6th day of November, 1884, the plaintiff herein appointed the defendants herein as its agents to sell its threshing…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Johnston, J.:
By the first count of the petition, the plaintiff seeks to recover the unearned portion of the commission paid by it to its agents, and no reason is seen why the facts alleged do not warrant a recovery. The amount of the commission which the agents should receive was fixed by the contract, and no commission was to be paid on any sales made by the agents to irresponsible parties, nor where the debts for which machinery was sold were uncollectible. The plaintiff alleges that certain machinery was sold to certain parties on credit, for…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Scribner v. PalmerWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- Brown v. Estate of FunckSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
- Morris v. BradleyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910