Clark v. Topeka Flour Mills Co.

Citations

• 109 Kan. 306
• 198 P. 935
• 1921 Kan. LEXIS 132

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Sale op Flour — Negotiations Through Broker — Minds of Contracting Parties Never Met — No Completed Contract. The appellant, claiming that he bought from the appellee 5,000 barrels of flour delivered in Chicago and that only 4,000 barrels were shipped, bought 1,000 barrels at an advanced price and sued to recover the difference. Held, that the evidence is sufficient to sustain findings to the effect that he' had no contract with the appellee because the minds of the parties never met on the terms of a contract by reason of appellant’s failure to agree to the terms of a written confirmation sent him.</p> <p>2. Same — No Acceptance of Written Confirmation of Terms of Sale Made Known by Appellant. A milling company at Topeka .sold 5,000 barrels of flour at a certain price to a broker at Kansas City, and under his directions shipped the flour to the appellant at Chicago at an advanced price by which the broker was to receive twelve cents per barrel commission. Appellee sent a written confirmation to the appellant offering to enter into a contract direct with him for the sale of the flour, which he retained, but he never informed appellee whether he agreed to it or not. Held, that if he had any contract with the appellee it was upon the terms stated in the written confirmation.</p> <p>3. Same — Diversion of Part of Flour to Third Person — Appellant’s Consent Thereto. Even accepting the view that the parties had a contract for 5,000 barrels of flour, the evidence was sufficient to sustain a finding that the appellant authorized the shipment of a thousand barrels to a third person, and that the diversion of the flour amounted to a delivery under the contract.</p>