Bell v. Jordan

Decision Date29 October 1906
Citation102 Me. 67,65 A. 759
PartiesBELL v. JORDAN et al.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

Agreed Statement from Superior Court, Cumberland County.

Action by James Bell against James P. Jordan and others. Submitted on agreed statement of facts. Remanded for assessment of damages.

Assumpsit to recover damages for the breach of a contract whereby the defendants agreed to sell and deliver to the plaintiff 5,000 cases of sweet corn during the year 1903. The defendants failed to sell and deliver any sweet corn to the plaintiff under this contract Thereupon the plaintiff brought this action for the recovery of damages. An agreed statement of facts was filed and the case sent to the law court, with the agreement that the case should be submitted for hearing and argument on the agreed statement of facts, damages to be assessed by the judge of the superior court after the liabilities of the defendants had been finally determined by the law court.

Argued before WISWELL, C. J., and WHITEHOUSE, SAVAGE, POWERS, PEABODY, and SPEAR, JJ.

George P. Gould, for plaintiff. Bird & Bradley, for defendants.

WHITEHOUSE, J. This is an action to recover damages for the breach of a contract for the sale of sweet corn, and the case comes to this court on an agreed statement of facts.

The plaintiff was a wholesale grocer, doing business at Philadelphia, and the defendants were packers of sweet corn, doing business at Portland, Me., with factories at North Turner and New Gloucester. In the month of January, 1903, the plaintiff entered into the following written contract with the defendants, viz.:

"Sold to Mr. James Bell, Philadelphia, Pa.,

"For account of the United Packers, Portland, Maine, five thousand (5,000) cases, two dozen each, 'High Maine Standard' corn, of crop 1903.

"Price, 80 cents per dozen, f. o. b. Portland, Me., with rate of freight from Portland, Me., to Philadelphia, Pa., allowed buyer.

"Cans to be covered by tissues furnished by seller, and buyer's plain labels to be pasted on the outside of the tissues, and allowance to be made buyer for labels of $100 per thousand.

"One thousand (1,000) cases of the goods covered by this contract to be shipped and billed as soon as packed and ready to send forward, and the remaining four thousand (4,000) cases to be shipped later as instructed by buyer, with the understanding that the entire lot is to be sent forward before freezing weather. All goods to be billed when shipped.

"In case of short crop, owing to circumstances beyond the control of the packer, 70% delivery to be guaranteed buyer, and 10% of purchase price to be paid buyer by seller for any quantity delivered short of the 70% guaranteed by this contract.

"Terms: Cash in 10 days, less 1 1/2%."

In the summer and fall of the year of 1903 there was a short crop of corn, owing to circumstances beyond the control of the defendants, and consequently the defendants were able to pack only 40 per cent. of the total amount of corn which they had contracted to sell and deliver to purchasers.

Although the plaintiff was ready at all times to receive and pay for the corn specified in the contract, in accordance with its terms, the defendants failed to deliver any corn whatever, or to perform any of the terms of their contract

The controversy between the parties involves a construction of the last clause of the contract, relating to the obligation of the defendants "in case of a short crop." The plaintiff claims that, although there was a short crop, the defendants by the stipulations in their contract, considered together, should have delivered to him 40 per cent. of the total 5,000 cases which they engaged to deliver, and paid him 10 per cent. of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Baybutt Const. Corp. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 4 Enero 1983
    ...light of all the circumstances under which it was made. Forbes v. Wells Beach Casino, Inc., 307 A.2d 210, 216 (Me.1973); Bell v. Jordan, 102 Me. 67, 70, 65 A. 759 (1906). Such intention must be gathered from the written instrument, construed in respect to the subject-matter, the motive and ......
  • Zamore v. Whitten
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 4 Diciembre 1978
    ...always be allowed to prevail unless some established principle of law or sound public policy would thereby be violated." Bell v. Jordan, 102 Me. 67, 65 A. 759 (1906). There must be a meeting of the minds of the parties to the contract, i. e., a mutual assent to be bound by its terms, and th......
  • Forbes v. Wells Beach Casino, Inc.
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 28 Junio 1973
    ...of the agreement viewed in the light of the circumstances under which it was made unless a rule of law or policy forbids. Bell v. Jordan, 102 Me. 67, 65 A. 759 (1906); Gray v. Richards, 120 Me. 183, 113 A. 9 We must analyze the language used by the contracting parties to determine whether t......
  • Katz v. New England Fuel Oil Co.
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • 6 Mayo 1938
    ...326; Ames v. Hilton, 70 Me. 36; Veazie v. Forsaith, 76 Me. 172; Union Water Power Company v. Lewiston, 101 Me. 564, 65 A. 67; Bell v. Jordan, 102 Me. 67, 65 A. 759; Bar Harbor & Union River Power Company v. Foundation Company, 129 Me. 81, 149 A. Article XVII, a sweeping one, is last but two......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT