Skip to main content
· 10/15/1887

I. Frank & Co. v. Eltringham

Citations

  • 65 Miss. 281

Syllabus

<p>Frauds, statute of. Memorandum, of sale of goods. Sufficiency of.</p> <p>A memorandum of a bargain for the sale of goods is not sufficient, under Sec. 1295, Code of 1880 (the statute of frauds), if the buyer and seller cannot be distinguished, the one from the other, by the face of the memorandum, without resort to parol testimony.</p> <p>Same. Memorandum of contract of sale. Case in judgment.</p> <p>An instrument as follows: — “ I. F. & Co., White St., New York. No. 120. Natchez, Miss., address A. E., at I. Landing. Ship, when?...... Ship, how?,..... Insure...... Care...... Terms, reg. Date...... Bill, Oct. 1. Refer to...... |-Lot. | Doz. | Remarks. | Price. ¡ ” with an inventory thereunder of goods to the value of $384 00, and signed by the agent of I. F. & Co. — is insufficient as a memorandum of a contract of sale, under Sec. 1295 (statute of frauds, Code 1880), to sustain an action against I. F. & Co. by A. E., it being impossible to decide by the memorandum who was seller, and who buyer.</p>

Judges: Campbell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.