Robinson v. Welleb
Decision Date | 19 December 1888 |
Parties | Robinson v. Welleb. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Defendant, living in Chattanooga, Tenn., advertised a lot for sale. Plaintiff, living in Rome, Ga., wrote defendant, inquiring the price, to which she replied, giving her terms, one-third cash and the remainder on time. Plaintiff replied from Rome by telegram: Held, that "defendant's offer meant that the cash was to be paid to her, and the deeds delivered at Chattanooga, and that plaintiff's telegram was therefore not an unconditional acceptance, and did not bind defendant.
Defendant, after receipt of the telegram, wrote plaintiff that she was sorry to write him, hut that just after sending him the letter containing her terms she had received a better offer. Held, that, even if this letter indicated that she thought she had made a binding contract with plaintiff, it did not prevent her from taking advantage of the insufficiency of the acceptance.
Error from superior court, Floyd county; Maddox, Judge.
Action for breach of contract to convey land, brought by Thomas L. Robinson against Mrs. G. A. Weller. The court ordered a nonsuit, and plaintiff brings error.
Junius F. Hillyer and C. N. Featherston, for plaintiff in error. Reese & Denny, for defendant in error.
Simmons, J. Robinson sued Mrs. Weller for damages sustained by breach of contract by the defendant to sell him a certain house and lot in Rome, Ga., the alleged contract consisting of the following advertisement, telegram, and letters: (1) Newspaper advertisement: "(2) Postal-card addressed to Mrs. G. A. Weller, 351 Montgomery avenue, Chattanooga, Tenn., as follows: "(3) Letter from Mrs. Georgia Weller: "(4) Telegram from Robinson to Mrs. Weller: "(5) Letter from Robinson to Mrs. Weller of same date as above telegram: ' " The above advertisement and correspondence were introduced in evidence, and also the following letter from Mrs. Weller: With this evidence the testimony for "the plaintiff closed. The defendant demurred to this evidence, and moved for...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Anderson v. Stewart
...Arnett v. Tuller, 134 Ga. 609, 68 S.E. 330; Hinish v. Oliver, 66 Kan. 282, 71 P. 520; Sharp v. West, D. C., 150 F. 458; Robinson v. Weller, 81 Ga. 704, 8 S.E. 447; Greenawalt Este, 40 Kan. 418, 19 P. 803; Hall v. Jones, 164 N.C. 199, 80 S.E. 228; Whitaker-Glessner Co. v. Clark, 98 W.Va. 19,......
-
Fraser v. Jarrett
...of any sort. There must be the mutual assent of the parties, and they must assent to the same thing in the same sense. Robinson v. Weller. 81 Ga. 704, 8 S.E. 447; Harris v. Amoskeag Lumber Co., 97 Ga. 465, 25 519; Gray v. Lynn, 139 Ga. 294, 77 S.E. 156; Phinizy v. Bush, 129 Ga. 479, 59 S.E.......
-
Phinizy v. Bush
... ... by the acceptance of his offer by the buyer, the offer must ... be accepted unequivocally, unconditionally, and without ... variance. Robinson v. Weller, 81 Ga. 704, 8 S.E ... 447. Treating the two letters of November 7th as applying to ... Phinizy's stock alone, was the telegram of ... ...
-
Winer v. Flournoy Realty Co.
... ... purchaser unequivocally, unconditionally, and without ... variance of any sort. Gray v. Lynn, 139 Ga. 294, 77 ... S.E. 156; Robinson v. Weller, 81 Ga. 704, 8 S.E ... 447; Parker v. Stubbs, 139 Ga. 46 (1), 76 S.E. 571; ... Dillin-Morris Co. v. Gillispie, 15 Ga.App. 210, 82 ... ...