Powers v. Curtis

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Powers v. Curtis, 147 Pa. 340 (Pa. 1892)
23 A. 450; 1892 Pa. LEXIS 846
Green, Heydrick, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Pee, Sterreti, Williams

Powers v. Curtis

Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam,

We do not think the court below erred in refusing to take off the nonsuit. The plaintiff’s evidence did not establish a contract between the parties. The plaintiff stated, when upon the witness stand, that No. 1 of the series of leaflets was not made in accordance with the specifications received by him from the defendant. It was sent to the latter with the price marked *342upon it, “ one hundred dollars, if satisfactory.” It was not satisfactory, and was returned to the plaintiff. The plaintiff then sent the defendant No. 2 of the series, and, on Oct. 1, 1889, defendant wrote to plaintiff, that “ the primers are good, but I do not care to pay the price you name. Your first offer is $100 for the series; your favor of the 27th names $200; I am afraid, by the time the series are finished, the price would be up in the thousands.” We need not refer at length to the correspondence between the parties. It is sufficient to say, that it does not disclose a contract, or the consent of two minds to a proposition.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Cited By
1 case
Status
Published
Syllabus
Contract — Evidence. Defendant wrote to plaintiff stating that he would like to have him prepare some advertising leaflets. Plaintiff prepared a leaflet and sent it to defendant with the price marked upon it “ one hundred dollars, if satisfactory.” It was not satisfactory and was returned to plaintiff, who then sent the second leaflet of the series with a letter in which he said: “I put down in my book $200 against you, but I’ll wipe it all out if I cant suit you.” Defendant then replied, “ the primers are good, but I do not care to pay the price you name, your first offer is $100 for' the series; your favor of the 27th names $200; I am afraid by the time the series are finished the price would be up in the thousands.” Held, that the evidence did not disclose a contract, or the consent of two minds to a proposition.