American Cotton Co. v. Herring
Citations
- 84 Miss. 693
Syllabus
<p>1. Sales. Contract. Breach by buyer. Remedy of seller.</p> <p>On the breach of a contract to purchase personal property the seller may:</p> <p>(<?.) Complete the contract on his part, and sue for the contract price; or</p> <p>(8) Treat the contract as ended, retain the property as his own, and sue for the difference between the market value and the contract price; or</p> <p>(e) Sell the property at public or private sale for the best price he can obtain, and sue for the difference between the price realized and the contract price.</p> <p>2. Same. Case. Measwre of damages.</p> <p>Where by the terms of a contract defendant agreed to buy plaintiff’s cotton during a season at an agreed sum per hundred pounds less than the market price of cotton in a certain city on the day of sale and the plaintiff tendered a designated number of bales when the market price in said city was 9 13-16 cents per pound, which the defendant refused to buy at that price, but offered to do so on the basis of 9 9-16 cents per pound as the city market price, which plaintiff declined, subsequently selling at 9 cents per pound, the measure of plaintiff’s damages is not the difference between 9 and 9 13-16 cents per pound, but the difference between 9 9-16 and 9 13-16 cents per pound.</p> <p>3. Same.</p> <p>Where defendant agreed to purchase all complainant’s cotton during a season at twelve cents per one hundred pounds below the actual bona fide market value of the cotton in a warehouse at another place, and the agreement stated that the price would “ordinarily” be based on the last official quotation of the day, though defendant was not bound to adopt the closing quotations for the day as a basis by which to estimate th'e price which it would pay for the cotton, it could not, at any time, under the contract, compel complainant to take less than twelve cents per hundred pounds below the actual value of the cotton, whatever basis was adopted in arriving at that value.</p> <p>4. Sales. Waiver by s
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding principal and teacher to be a public officer for purposes of challenging removal by means of quo warranto
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Harris
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.