Mayo v. J. L. Price Brokerage Co.

• Decision Date: 28 February 1920
• Docket Number: No. 2487.,2487.
• Citation: 218 S.W. 932
• Parties: MAYO et al. v. J. L. PRICE BROKERAGE CO.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

218 S.W. 932

MAYO et al. v. J. L. PRICE BROKERAGE CO.

No. 2487.

Springfield Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 28, 1920.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pemiscot County; Sterling H. McCarty, Judge.

Action by J. R. Mayo and W. M. Robinson, copartners doing business under the firm and style name of Mayo & Robinson, against the J. L. Price Brokerage Company. From judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Duncan & Corbett, of Caruthersville, and W. K. Amick, of St. Joseph, for appellant. Ward & Reeves, of Caruthersville, for respondents.

STURGIS, P. J.

The plaintiffs are a wholesale grocery firm at Caruthersville, Mo., and defendant is a commission firm at St. Joseph, Mo. This suit is for damages for breach of contract by which defendant sold to plaintiffs two carloads of potatoes at $1.27 per bushel to be delivered to plaintiffs at Caruthersville. The contract was made October 13, 1916, by telegrams. By the first telegram, sent from St. Joseph, Mo., defendant offered to sell plaintiffs two carloads of potatoes, "shipment as quick as can get ears dollar twenty-seven delivered." Plaintiffs answered, accepting the offer on condition that the potatoes were first-class stock and asked confirmation. Defendant answered confirming sale "subject to delay account car shortage." One car of these potatoes was delivered, and there is no controversy as to that. The other car was not delivered, the defendant definitely notifying plaintiffs that it would not deliver the other car on December 4, 1916. Plaintiffs sue for the difference between the contract and market prices of those potatoes. The verdict is for plaintiffs for $240, and defendant appeals.

The defendant offered no evidence, and the court gave all the instructions it asked. It will not be necessary to do more than note briefly the informally assigned errors on defendant's behalf.

We must overrule the contention that the contract does not require delivery of the potatoes at Caruthersville. The plaintiffs' place of business was Caruthersville, and when defendant by telegrams from St. Joseph, Mo., offered to sell plaintiffs two cars of potatoes at the named price "delivered," there could be but one fair meaning of the offer, and that is delivered at Caruthersville. That such was the understanding and intention of the parties is evident, and the subsequent acts and correspondence confirm this understanding.

This being true, the contract was to be performed at Caruthersville, and its breach accrued the cause of action there, and that county was the proper venue of this action. Peak v. International Harvester Co., 194 Mo. App. 128, 186 S. W. 574.

We agree that the measure of damages for breach of contract of sale of goods is the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time and place of the breach. No citation of authorities is necessary. We do not agree, however, that there was no sufficient evidence of such market price. Plaintiffs' manager testified that he had active charge of the buying and selling, and, as his firm was dealing quite largely in potatoes, it is a fair and almost necessary inference that he kept himself posted as to the market price. He testified that the price of potatoes kept going up from the date of this contract till in December, when defendant breached the contract, and after that time; that he bought potatoes for his firm in place of the car that defendant refused to ship and was compelled to pay $1.75 per bushel. As it is shown that h...