Stephenson v. Cady
Decision Date | 11 January 1875 |
Citation | 117 Mass. 6 |
Parties | George A. Stephenson v. Resolved W. Cady |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Argued November 12, 1874
Suffolk. Contract for non-delivery of yarn under the following agreements in writing, each of which was signed "Greystone Mills, Zebulon Whipple, Agent."
Trial in the Superior Court, before Brigham, C. J., without a jury, who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows:
The defendant made with the plaintiff the contracts alleged in the declaration; and between October 24, 1871, and November 28, 1871, made nineteen deliveries of yarns under the second and third contracts,--all of the yarns required under the first contract, excepting 445 pounds, and 496 1/4 pounds of twenty-six two-ply yarns under the third contract,--and upon these deliveries, which were accompanied by bills of each parcel delivered, marked "cash," the defendant drew thirteen sight drafts on the plaintiff, for sums of from $ 150 to $ 400, all of which drafts were duly paid by the plaintiff, excepting a draft for $ 400 drawn by the defendant on the plaintiff, on November 29, 1871, refused acceptance on December 2 following, and payment on December 5 following, by the plaintiff, and duly protested for non-acceptance and non-payment. The drafts were not drawn for the exact sum due at the time, but for sums approximating to the sums then due.
The plaintiff and the defendant accounted together in the matter of the deliveries and payments on November 25, 1871, and their accounts to that date were then settled by an "allowance" to the plaintiff of $ 20.40, and his payment of $ 19.84 in cash to balance the accounts.
On November 27 and 28, 1871, the defendant made deliveries of yarns under the contracts to the plaintiff, the contract prices of which were $ 260.71 and $ 148.81, and thereupon drew the draft of $ 400 on the plaintiff, and the same was refused acceptance as aforesaid.
The defendant's mill, in which the yarns had been and were expected to be manufactured, was burned on the morning of December 1, 1871.
On December 2, 1871, the plaintiff sent to the defendant's agent in the contract, Zebulon Whipple, the following letter:
On December 8, following, Whipple called upon the plaintiff in Boston, to pay the price of the parcels of yarn delivered to him on November 27 and November 28, and the plaintiff refused to pay the same unless the defendant would give him security for the entire fulfilment of the contracts; Whipple thereupon declared to the plaintiff that the defendant was under no legal obligation to fulfil the contracts, inasmuch as the plaintiff had violated them by refusing to accept or to pay the draft of $ 400. Thereupon, Whipple sued out of the Superior Court a writ in favor of the defendant against the plaintiff in an action of contract for the price of the yarns delivered to the plaintiff on November 27 and on November 28 and was proceeding to attach the plaintiff's stock in trade, when the plaintiff, to avoid the service of the writ by attachment, paid to him the sum of $ 409.52, the full price of the yarns delivered on November 27 and on November 28. Whipple and the plaintiff then parted angrily, and without any agreement or understanding as to further deliveries of yarn under the contracts, the plaintiff claiming a right to such deliveries, and the defendant denying such right, and no communication was had between them until on January 4, 1872, the plaintiff caused to be delivered to Whipple the following letter: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pulitzer Publishing Co. v. Mcnichols
......319; Bell v. Hoffman, 92. N.C. 273; Godchaux v. Hyde, 52 So. 269; Gardner. v. The Roycrofters, 118 N.Y.S. 703; Stephenson v. Cady, 117 Mass. 6; O'Neill v. Supreme. Council, 70 N. J. Law 410; Anvil Co. v. Humble, 153 U.S. 540. . . Judson,. ......
-
Barrie v. Quimby
...control of the property transferred to the buyers. Hatch v. Bayley, 12 Cush. 27;Stearns v. Washburn, 7 Gray, 187, 189;Stephenson v. Cady, 117 Mass. 6, 10;Dr. A. P. Sawyer Medicine Co. v. Anderson, 178 Mass. 374, 377, 59 N. E. 1022;Cox v. Andersen, 194 Mass. 136, 80 N. E. 236. Yet even then ......
-
Barrie v. Quimby
...the control of the property transferred to the buyers. Hatch v. Bayley, 12 Cush. 27; Stearns v. Washburn, 7 Gray, 187, 189; Stephenson v. Cady, 117 Mass. 6, 10; Dr. A. P. Sawyer Medicine Co. v. Anderson, 178 Mass. 374, 377, 59 N.E. 1022; Cox v. Andersen, 194 Mass. 136, 80 N.E. 236. Yet even......
-
Golden Valley Land & Cattle Company, a Corp. v. Johnstone
...6 N.D. 543, 38 L.R.A. 760, 72 N.W. 938; Giltner v. Rayl, 93 Iowa 16, 61 N.W. 225; Beyson v. McCone, 121 Cal. 153, 53 P. 637; Stephenson v. Cady, 117 Mass. 6; Armstrong v. St. Paul & P. Coal & I. Co. 48 113, 49 N.W. 233, 50 N.W. 1029; Peters Grocery Co. v. Collins Bag Co. 142 N.C. 174, 55 S.......