Legal Opinion

Mark v. H. D. Williams Cooperage Co.

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided May 29, 1907PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Butler Circuit Court. — Row. J. L. Fort, Judge. (1) What respondent thought the figures describing the discount meant is not material. It accepted the offer and is bound by its terms. Expressed intention only is considered in determining whether the parties’ minds met, and the unexpressed or secret intention of one party cannot change the obligation.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Butler Circuit Court. — Row. J. L. Fort, Judge. (1) What respondent thought the figures describing the discount meant is not material. It accepted the offer and is bound by its terms. Expressed intention only is considered in determining whether the parties’ minds met, and the unexpressed or secret intention of one party cannot change the obligation. The price of the pipe can only be calculated by the application of the decimal fraction used by appellants to describe the discount and not by considering the figures used to describe the decimal as two separate discounts. 1 Parsons…

1Opinion of the CourtLamm, J.

Plaintiffs, doing business as partners in Chicago, Illinois, on June 20, 1902, sued defendant, a domestic corporation doing business in Butler county, Missouri, for a balance due on the sale and delivery of certain black and galvanized pipe of sundry dimensions on two dates, to-wit, March 22 and April 11,1902. *249The petition counts on the theory that the agreed selling price of the pipe was $2,232.30, and that defendant had paid thereon $1,829.13, leaving a balance due of $403.17, for which amount judgment was prayed.

At a trial in February, 1904, to the court without a jury, the issues were…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Strait Scale Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1929
  2. Summers v. KellerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
  3. McIntyre v. Kansas City Coca Cola Bottling Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1949
  4. Minneapolis Threshing MacHine Co. v. BradfordMissouri Court of Appeals · 1921
  5. Massey-Harris Harvester Co. v. Federal Reserve BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1932

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API