French v. Pullman Motor Car Co.
French v. Pullman Motor Car Co.
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff sued to recover damages for the breach of a contract, under seal, constituting him the agent for the sale of the defendant’s cars in Philadelphia and vicinity for one year with the privilege of renewal for another year, He alleged his compliance with the contract and the failure of the defendant to deliver a part of the cars ordered and to renew the contract as agreed. The terms of the agreement, in relation to the manner by which payment was to be made for the cars, was not carried out by either of the parties and the main questions of fact at the trial were whether the agreement had been abandoned and an oral agreement substituted therefor, or whether there had been merely a waiving by parol of a part of the original covenant. These questions were submitted by a charge that is a model of clearness and accuracy and we find nothing in the voluminous record that calls for a reversal of the judgment.
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 6 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Contracts — Contracts under seal — Waiver of covenants — Rescission — Breach of covenant — Assumpsit—Case for jury — Measure of damages. , In an action to recover damages for tbe alleged breach of a contract, under seal, constituting the plaintiff the agent for one year for the sale of defendant’s automobiles in a designated territory, it appeared by the terms of the contract that the plaintiff had the privilege of renewal for another year. Plaintiff complained that defendant had violated the contract by refusing to deliver all the cars, and by refusing to renew the contract though requested so to do. Defendant alleged that the contract had been rescinded by parol, and offered evidence that the cars delivered to plaintiff had not been paid for in the manner provided in the contract. Plaintiff conceded that he had not paid for the cars in the manner provided in the contract but contended that certain covenants of the contract as to the payment for cars had been mutually waived by parol, but that in other respects the contract remained in force until the time of the alleged breach. Held, the question as to whether the contract had been entirely abandoned or whether there had been a waiver by parol of certain covenants thereof, was properly left to the jury.