Bodman v. Nathaniel Fisher & Co.

Citations

• 268 Pa. 535
• 112 A. 99
• 1920 Pa. LEXIS 732

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Principal and agent — Sale of goods on commission— Damages — Loss of time — Partial breach.</p> <p>1. Where an agent is employed to sell goods on commission, all orders to be “subject to the acceptance” of the principal, with an understanding that orders not accepted were to be returned, and the agent claims, in a suit for commissions, that certain orders had been accepted, and shipments made thereon, the case is for the jury, where the agent testifies that the orders in question had not been returned, and that he had gone over the orders covered by the agreement at the principal’s office at different times, and discussed the question of final shipment.</p> <p>2. Plaintiff was not bound to show that the goods were, in fact, shipped into the territory allotted to him.</p> <p>3. Fair business dealing required defendant to accept all orders sent in by plaintiff, which, in the exercise of sound business judgment, they would be expected reasonably to accept. The sufficiency of the reasons for refusing the orders is for the jury.</p> <p>4. Where plaintiff, in such case, claims damages for loss of time, because of defendant’s refusal to permit the taking of further orders and failure to furnish samples, the measure of damages should be based on commissions made during the time plaintiff worked without interruption, and with a full line of samples.</p> <p>5. The fact that the contract was not entirely rescinded will not prevent a recovery for loss sustained by reason of there being a partial breach.</p> <p>Appeals — Assignments of error — Charge—Exceptions.</p> <p>6. Assignments of error to portions of the charge must show exception taken.</p>