Rahm v. Klerner & Sons
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of the city of Richmond, rendered July 3, 1899, in an action of assumpsit, wherein the plaintiff in error was the plaintiff, and the defendants in error were the defendants.
1Opinion of the CourtBuchanan, J.
This is an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff in error to recover damages for breach of an alleged contract by which the defendants had agreed to employ the plaintiff as agent to sell their furniture, upon commission, in a certain territory.
As the agreement was not to be performed within a year, it was necessary, under the statute of frauds, that it, or some memorandum thereof, should be in writing. Clause seventh, section 2840, of the Code. To prove his case, the plaintiff introduced in evidence a correspondence between himself and the defendants in reference to his employment. The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hale v. HaleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1894
- Darling v. Cumming's Ex'orSupreme Court of Virginia · 1896
3Cited by16 opinions
- Reynolds v. DixonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1948
- Moorman v. Blackstock, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2008
- Graham v. Henderson Elevator Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1916
- Wood & Brooks Co. v. D. E. Hewit Lumber Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
- Harper v. PauleyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1953
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.