Emerson v. Patch
| Decision Date | 14 January 1878 |
| Citation | 123 Mass. 541 |
| Parties | Moses E. Emerson v. Paul D. Patch, executor |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Argued November 8, 1877
Essex. Contract, on an account annexed, for wood sold and delivered to Charles Dustin, the defendant's testator.
At the trial in the Superior Court, before Gardner, J., the plaintiff put in evidence the report of an auditor in his favor, and rested his case. The report of the auditor stated that the plaintiff sold the wood, charged in the account annexed, to Edward Foye, who was then engaged in manufacturing bricks for Dustin, under a written agreement by the terms of which Dustin agreed to furnish all necessary materials for making the bricks, except the clay; that the number of cords and the price were agreed on by the plaintiff and Foye, and the wood was delivered at the brick-yard occupied by Foye, and was there used by him in burning the bricks made by him for Dustin under the agreement; that Dustin, during the progress of making the bricks, was frequently at the brick-yard, and observed what was being done, and, after the burning was finished, sold a part of the bricks; a part was sold by Foye, and the remainder, after the death of Dustin, were taken and sold by the defendant; that at the time of the sale and delivery of the wood in question the plaintiff was not informed of the agreement between Dustin and Foye, and had no knowledge that Dustin or any other person had any interest or responsibility in or about the business except Foye, and his first information upon that subject was within one week before the commencement of this action, when he learned of the existence of the written agreement between Dustin and Foye; that in the meantime, on November 12, 1874, Dustin and Foye made a settlement of their accounts, in which Dustin released and gave up to Foye certain promissory notes which he held against him, and Foye released to Dustin his claim for making the bricks, and also executed to Dustin a bill receipted for the wood in question or the larger portion of it, (dated October 27, 1874,) and made a final adjustment of their account of the business of manufacturing the bricks; and upon these facts found that the plaintiff was entitled to recover for the price of the wood so sold and delivered to Foye, and stated the account.
The defendant offered no evidence, but contended that the findings of the auditor were not justified by the facts reported by him. The plaintiff contended that he was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Peaslee v. Ross
...The removal from the jury of the question of duress was an error. In this particular the case is the same as the recent case of Emerson v. Patch, 123 Mass. 541; Same Same, 129 Mass. 299. The evidence was such that the jury, with proper instructions from the court as to the rules of law appl......
-
Lamb v. Thompson
...Contracts, 63; Story, Agency, 449; Thomas v. Atkinson, 38 Ind. 248; Knapp v. Simon, 96 N.Y. 284; Ketchum v. Verdell, 42 Ga. 534; Emerson v. Patch, 123 Mass. 541.) And this the rule laid down by Lord Tenterden, 9 Barn. & Cres., 78, though dissented from in three English cases. J. E. Cobbey, ......
-
Senor v. Bangor Mills, 11104.
...the principal has benefited. Fradley v. Hyland, C.C.N.Y.1888, 37 F. 49, 2 L.R.A. 749; Bush v. Devine, Del.1854, 5 Harr. 375; Emerson v. Patch, 1878, 123 Mass. 541; Harder v. Continental Printing & P. C. Co., N.Y.1909, 64 Misc. 89, 117 N.Y.S. 1001; Southern R. Co. v. W. A. Simpkins Co., 1919......
-
Emerson v. Patch
...Contract on an account annexed for wood sold and delivered to Charles Dustin, the defendant's testator. After the former trial, reported 123 Mass. 541, the case was tried the Superior Court, before Brigham, C. J., and the plaintiff put in evidence the report of an auditor in his favor, and ......