Skip to main content
· 11/29/1886

Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway v. Columbus Rolling Mill

Citations

  • 119 U.S. 149
  • 7 S. Ct. 168
  • 30 L. Ed. 376
  • 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1972

Syllabus

<p>A reply to an offer of sale, purporting to accept it on terms varying from those offered, is a rejection of the offer and leaves it no longer open.</p> <p>, On December 8, A offered to sell to B 2000 to 5000 tons of iron rails on certain terms specified, adding that if the offer was accepted A would expect to be notified prior to December 20. On December 16, B replied, directing A to enter an order for 1200 tons, “ as per your favor of the 8th.” On December 18, A declined to fulfil B’s order. Held, that the negotiation between the parties was closed, and that an acceptance by B on December 19 of the original offer did* not bind A.</p> <p>The submission of a question of law to the jury is no ground of exception jf they decide it aright.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “The submission of a question of law to the jury is no ground of exception, if they decide it aright.”
  • order for 1200 tons of steel rails indicated rejection of offer to sell 2000-5000 tons of rails

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gray

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.