Simmons Hardware Co. v. Mullen

Minnesota Supreme Court
Simmons Hardware Co. v. Mullen, 33 Minn. 195 (Minn. 1885)
22 N.W. 294; 1885 Minn. LEXIS 41
Gilfillan

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 3 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

Simmons Hardware Co. v. Mullen

Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C. J.

The agreement for the sale of the goods by plaintiff to Whiteher, the price exceeding $50, and there being no memorandum in writing, and no part of the purchase-money being paid, was void under the statute of frauds, unless there was not only a delivery by the vendor, but an acceptance on the part of the purchaser. The authorities are substantially uniform that delivery by the seller *196to a carrier selected by him, for the purpose of transportation, is not of itself an acceptance to take the case out of the operation of the statute. Norman v. Phillips, 14 M. & W. 277; Hanson v. Armitage, 5 Barn. & Ald. 557; Maxwell v. Brown, 39 Me. 98; Johnson v. Cuttle, 105 Mass. 447; Grimes v. Van Vechten, 20 Mich. 410; Allard v. Greasert, 61 N. Y. 1; Keiwert v. Meyer, 62 Ind. 587; Taylor v. Mueller, 30 Minn. 343.

The plaintiff in this instance selected the carrier. It is unnecessary, therefore, to consider what would have been the effect, in respect to taking the case out of the statute, of delivery to a carrier designated by the purchaser. Whitcher not having done any act of acceptance, the goods still belonged to the plaintiff, and could not have been levied on as Whitcher’s.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Simmons Hardware Company v. Aaron J. Mullen
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published