I. Frank & Co. v. Eltringham
I. Frank & Co. v. Eltringham
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The note or memorandum of the bargain is not sufficient under-§ 1295 of the Code. It fails to show who is seller and who is buyer. It is impossible to determine from the writing whether the appellants agreed to buy from the appellee or vice versa.
Reversed and remanded.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- I. Frank & Co. v. A. Eltringham
- Cited By
- 4 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Frauds, statute of. Memorandum, of sale of goods. Sufficiency of. A memorandum of a bargain for the sale of goods is not sufficient, under Sec. 1295, Code of 1880 (the statute of frauds), if the buyer and seller cannot be distinguished, the one from the other, by the face of the memorandum, without resort to parol testimony. Same. Memorandum of contract of sale. Case in judgment. An instrument as follows: — “ I. F. & Co., White St., New York. No. 120. Natchez, Miss., address A. E., at I. Landing. Ship, when?...... Ship, how?,..... Insure...... Care...... Terms, reg. Date...... Bill, Oct. 1. Refer to...... |-Lot. | Doz. | Remarks. | Price. ¡ ” with an inventory thereunder of goods to the value of $384 00, and signed by the agent of I. F. & Co. — is insufficient as a memorandum of a contract of sale, under Sec. 1295 (statute of frauds, Code 1880), to sustain an action against I. F. & Co. by A. E., it being impossible to decide by the memorandum who was seller, and who buyer.