Everts v. Selover

• Decision Date: 09 November 1880
• Citation: 7 N.W. 225,44 Mich. 519
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: EVERTS and another v. SELOVER.

7 N.W. 225

44 Mich. 519

EVERTS and another v. SELOVER.

Supreme Court of Michigan

November 9, 1880

Where a defendant subscribed for a book, upon the agreement that the proceeds of his office as justice for a certain period should be accepted in payment, held, that the person to whom such subscription was given could not repudiate such contract, so far as the mode of payment was concerned, and insist upon compliance with it in other respects, but must act upon it as an entirety.

Error to Branch.

Hiram Kimball, for plaintiffs in error.

John R Champion, for defendant in error.

COOLEY J.

This is an action brought to recover the subscription price of a local history. The subscription was obtained by an agent of the plaintiffs, and defendant signed his name to a promise to pay $10 on the delivery of the book. This promise was printed in a little book, made use of for the purpose of obtaining such subscriptions, and on the opposite page, in sight of one signing, was a reference to "rules to agents," printed on the first page of the book. One of these rules was that "no promise or statement made by an agent which interferes with the intent of the printed contract shall be valid," and patrons were warned under no circumstances to permit themselves to be persuaded into signing the subscription unless they expected to pay the price charged. From the evidence it appears that when Schenck, the agent solicited his subscription, the defendant was not inclined to give it, but finally told the agent he would take it provided his fees in the office of justice, then held by him, which should accrue from that time to the time of delivery of the book should be received as an equivalent. The agent assented, and defendant signed the subscription receiving at the same time from the agent the following paper:

"COLDWATER, April 29, 1878.

"Mr. Isaac M. Selover gives his order for one copy of our history, for which he agrees to pay on delivery all the proceeds of his office as justice from now till the delivery of said history.

"EVERTS & ABBOTTS, per Schenck."

The plaintiffs claim that the history was duly delivered, and they demand the subscription price, repudiating the undertaking of the agent to receive anything else, as being in excess of his authority and void. The defendant relies on that undertaking, and has brought into court $4.27 as the amount of his fees as justice for the period named. This statement of facts presents the questions at issue so far as they...