Cardwell v. Uhl

Citations

• 105 Kan. 249
• 182 P. 415
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 60

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Contract — Sale—Contract Repudiated — Action for Breach — Not Prematurely Brought. Where a seller, who has agreed to deliver goods within a certain time, notifies the buyer that he will not perform his contract, the latter may treat such action as an anticipatory breach and bring an action for damages without waiting for the expiration of the period originally allowed for delivery.</p> <p>2. Same — Renunciation — Issues Raised by Pleadings — Evidence. The plaintiff pleaded that the rules of the board of trade had been made a part of a contract for the sale of grain to him. The defendant answered denying the contract, and alleging that the board of trade was a gambling concern. No reply was filed. Held, that as no proof was made of the rules of the board of trade, and as the plaintiff did not in any way rely upon them, there was no occasion for submitting to the jury any issues concerning that body.</p> <p>3. Same — Confirmation of Oral Contracts —■ Customs. Where there is evidence of a practice among grain dealers, which had been followed in prior transactions between the parties, to mail letters of confirmation of oral contracts, such confirmations are admissible in corroboration of testimony that oral contracts to which they refer were made.</p> <p>4. Same — Future Delivery of Wheat — Renunciation by Seller — Damages —Rights of Buyer. One who, having agreed to deliver goods within a fixed time, renounces the contract, cannot complain that the buyer de'lays for a short time to purchase elsewhere (giving him the opportunity meanwhile to reconsider and carry out his agreement), at least where no increase in the market price is shown to have occurred in the interval.</p>