Brunswig v. Farmers Grain, Fuel & Live Stock Co.

Citations

• 100 Kan. 261
• 164 P. 154
• 1917 Kan. LEXIS 307

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. C0NTRACT^-SA4pme?ii of Wheat — Contract Modified — Letter — Telegram — Destination Changed. Three contracts having been made for the shipment of wheat from Alden to Galveston, the seller wrote to the buyer saying: “Your favor of the 28th at hand. We regret that you will require us to load capacity cars on all grain sold. We will load them that way. We are ready to load out the first car for July shipment. Please give us billing to-morrow. The Santa Fe refuses to accept Galveston shipments. Please state what you want us to do with the wheat. What are you going to do about it?” On the next day the buyer wired the seller: “Bill wheat to Fort Worth, Texas.” Held, that in the absence of extraneous evidence indicating a different intention, the telegram is to be interpreted as authorizing a shipment to Fort Worth of all the wheat contracted for, and as effecting a modification of the contracts to that extent.</p> <p>2. Contract — Shipment of Wheat — Modified Contract Assigned — Rights of Assignee. One to whom the contracts were assigned after such modification, regardless of his knowledge thereof, could assert no rights against the seller under the original contracts except as so modified.</p> <p>8. Same. Where such assignee refused to accept and pay for a car of wheat'shipped under the first contract, giving as a reason that the shipment had not been made to Galveston, and showed by his conduct that he would not receive shipments made to Fort Worth, in an action brought against the seller for damages resulting from a failure to deliver wheat at Galveston, it is held that a judgment for the defendant was justified irrespective of other questions presented.</p>