Gowing v. Knowles
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for goods sold and delivered. Answer : 1. A general denial; 2. The statute of frauds. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., the defendants asked the judge to rule that the evidence did not show a contract of sale, or an acceptance and receipt of the goods. The judge refused so to rule, and submitted the case to the jury under instructions not otherwise excepted to.
Read the full summary
Contract for goods sold and delivered. Answer : 1. A general denial; 2. The statute of frauds. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., the defendants asked the judge to rule that the evidence did not show a contract of sale, or an acceptance and receipt of the goods. The judge refused so to rule, and submitted the case to the jury under instructions not otherwise excepted to. The jury found for the plaintiffs; and the defendants alleged exceptions, the substance of which appears in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtDevens, J.
The only inquiries presented are whether there was sufficient evidence of a contract of sale between the parties, and of a delivery and acceptance of the goods under the contract, to go to the jury, the instructions in other respects not having been excepted to.
The plaintiffs, in order to prove an executory contract previous to the delivery, relied solely upon a conversation between Grew *233one of the plaintiffs, and the defendant Knowles. Accepting the statement of Grew, which is the one most favorable to the plaintiffs, there was a proposition on the part of the plaintiffs to sell on certain…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Metropolitan Coal Co. v. Boutell Transportation & Towing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Lawrence v. RosenbergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Pontiac Shoe Manufacturing Co. v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1898
- McFarlane v. WadhamsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1908