Nomordust Chemical Co. v. J. A. Eberts & Co.

Citations

• 59 Pa. Super. 295
• 1915 Pa. Super. LEXIS 67

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Sales—Breach of contract — Measure of damages.</p> <p>1. Where goods, not specially manufactured, are ordered by description to be sent from a distance, are separated from bulk, appropriated for the purpose of the vendee, and delivered to a common carrier with bill of lading to the vendee, and the vendee inspects and refuses to accept the goods because of alleged short weight and promptly notifies the vendor, who declines to take them back and the goods are sold by the carrier, the measure of damages in an action brought by the vendor against the vendee, is the contract price of the goods.</p> <p>2. In an action to recover the price of a quantity of a dustless sweeping compound it appeared that the order of the defendant for the goods was “70 bbls. 200 lbs., 70 bbls. 100 lbs. and 50 kegs 50 lbs.” When the goods arrived at defendant’s station and were weighed, it was found that the weights of the barrels and kegs had been included with the contents in the weight as specified in the order. The defendant averred that the inducement to enter into the contract was an oral understanding that the weight of the packages should be excluded from the weights mentioned in the order. This was denied by the plaintiff. A part of the arrangement was that one of the plaintiff’s experienced employees should work up a trade and sell the compound for the defendants. The defendant offered to prove that this salesman was in fact an agent of the plaintiff, and that he had sold a number of persons on the defendant’s account a quantity of the compound at a certain price per pound without reference to the weight of the barrels. Held, that it was reversible error for the court to reject such an offer.</p>