Williams-Hayward Shoe Co. v. Brooks
Wyoming Supreme Court
EeeoR to tlie District Court, Sheridan County, Hon. Joseph L. Stotts, Judge. Action for the recovery of the price of goods alleged to have been sold and delivered to the defendants, On the trial the defendants objected to the proof by parol of the contract on the ground that the contract was within the statute of frauds, and that there was no note or memorandum signed by the party to be charged.
Read the full summary
EeeoR to tlie District Court, Sheridan County, Hon. Joseph L. Stotts, Judge. Action for the recovery of the price of goods alleged to have been sold and delivered to the defendants, On the trial the defendants objected to the proof by parol of the contract on the ground that the contract was within the statute of frauds, and that there was no note or memorandum signed by the party to be charged. Certain testimony was excluded which was offered to show that the contract was for the manufacture of goods, and therefore not within the statute. Judgment was for the defendants. Plaintiff prosecutes…
1Opinion of the Court
PotteR, Chief Justice.
This was an action for the recovery of a balance due for goods alleged to have been sold and delivered to defendants by plaintiff. The defendants sued were Lyman H. Brooks, John H. Ivey, and Ida Ivey, partners under the firm name and style of J. H. Ivey & Co. The petition alleges that between August 20, 1897, and April 25, 1898, at the special instance and request of defendants, the plaintiff sold and delivered to them goods, wares, and merchandise, in the ordinary course of business, of the value and agreed price of §1,068.51, and that, by reason thereof, the defendants…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Goddard v. BinneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Brandeis v. NeustadtlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Bonham v. . CraigSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- May v. SloanSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Render v. LillardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Winders v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Davison v. NicholsonWyoming Supreme Court · 1928
- Lucksinger v. SalisburyWyoming Supreme Court · 1953
- Lucksinger v. SalisburyWyoming Supreme Court · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.