W. T. Raleigh Med. Co. v. Stroud

• Decision Date: 06 October 1914
• Citation: 148 N.W. 875,158 Wis. 354
• Parties: W. T. RALEIGH MEDICAL CO. v. STROUD ET AL.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

158 Wis. 354

148 N.W. 875

W. T. RALEIGH MEDICAL CO.

v.STROUD ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 6, 1914.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Oconto County; Wm. B. Quinlan, Judge.

Action by the W. T. Raleigh Medical Company against John Stroud and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Oconto county in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants.

This action was commenced by the plaintiff, and it alleges an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant Stroud, for the sale of the plaintiff's products by Stroud, at prices fixed by the contract, and that the defendants Tillman and Arndt and one Jacob Spies guaranteed performance of the contract by Stroud.

From the record it appears that in the year 1909 the plaintiff and defendant Stroud entered into an agreement whereby Stroud agreed to devote his entire time to the sale of plaintiff's products at a price fixed by the plaintiff, and to pay for them the way specified, and in consideration thereof the plaintiff agreed to sell and deliver to the defendantits products. The defendants Alvin Tillman and A. G. Arndt, together with one Jacob Spies, guaranteed, in writing, the faithful performance of the contract by Stroud, and the payment of any balance due the plaintiff by the defendant Stroud. In the month of December of the year 1910, a representative of the plaintiff visited Stroud to arrange a settlement. After packing what goods the defendant Stroud had on hand, and Stroud receiving credit therefor, the amount of $790 was agreed to as the balance due the plaintiff from Stroud. The representative of the plaintiff company made out a note for that amount, and the defendant Stroud was to procure the signatures of the guarantors. There is a conflict in the testimony of plaintiff's representative and the defendant Stroud, as to whether Spies was to sign the note; plaintiff's representative testifying that the defendant Stroud told him it would be useless to try and procure Spies' signature, while defendant Stroud testifies that the understanding was that he was to secure the signatures of all guarantors to the note. Defendant Tillman was the first of the guarantors seen by Stroud who testifies that he saw Tillman, and that Tillman stated “he would sign the note, provided Mr. Arndt and Mr. Spies signed it.” After procuring this signature, Stroud and the plaintiff's representative went to see Mr. Arndt. Stroud testifies to the effect that Arndt stated, in the presence of the plaintiff's representative, that he (Arndt) would sign the note, provided Mr. Spies signed it, and that, if Spies would not sign it, the note was to be returned to him. Plaintiff's representative testified that he heard no such...