Ross v. Portland Coffee & Spice Co.

Citations

• 30 Wash. 647
• 71 P. 184
• 1903 Wash. LEXIS 360

Syllabus

<p>CONTRACT OP EMPLOYMENT-ADMISSIBILITY OP PAKOL TO VABY.</p> <p>Where a written contract for commissions to a salesman provides that goods returned by customers shall not be considered as sold, nor the salesman entitled to commissions thereon, and, further, that defendant reserves the right to reject any and all orders for any good and sufficient reason, parol evidence is inadmissible for the purpose of showing that defendant agreed as an inducement to the contract that the salesman should have a commission on all orders sent in and accepted by defendant.</p> <p>SAME-SALESMAN-BIGHT TO COMMISSIONS.</p> <p>Where a salesman’s contract for commissions provided that he should be paid monthly on all sales made during the preceding month, but that goods returned by customers should not be considered as sold, the salesman is entitled to commissions only upon that portion of an order for goods delivered to the customer and retained by him, when the terms of the order provided that part of the goods were to be delivered at a certain time and the “balance as ordered,” and that goods should be sent under a warranty, subject to the customer’s approval.</p> <p>SAME.</p> <p>Under a contract giving a salesman commissions at the end of each month on the sale of goods made by him, if not returned by the customer, he is entitled to commissions upon orders taken by him which were enforceable on the part of the vendor as binding contracts of sale, although providing for future delivery, if the order provided for their shipment on or before a certain date, and contained no conditions as to approval or right of countermand by the customer.</p>