McKeefry v. United States Radiator Co.
Citations
- 31 Pa. Super. 263
- 1906 Pa. Super. LEXIS 203
Syllabus
<p>Contract — Several and entire contract — Intention—Evidence.</p> <p>The entirety of a contract depends upon the intention of the parties and not upon the divisibility of the subject. The several nature of the latter may often assist in determining the intention, but -will not overcome the intention to make an entire contract when that is shown; nor will the mode of measuring the price, as by the bushel, ton or pound, change the effect of the agreement, even in entire contracts, from agreeing to partial payments, pending the full performance.</p> <p>In an action to recover the difference between the contract and market price of pig iron which defendant refused to accept, it appeared that defendant by an order in writing directed the plaintiff to forward 200 tons “at $21.00 per gross ton, Time of delivery; one ear per week, July and August.” The shipments began in August, and it appeared that they corresponded with .the orders given by the defendant company. The market price of pig iron decreased, and in December the defendant canceled its order, and the plaintiff was compelled to sell the undelivered balance aggregating seventy-two tons in the open market, at a loss. The various shipments were paid for as they were received. Held, that the court committed no error in instructing the jury that the contract was an entire contract.</p>
Judges: Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.