The Federal Reporter. Volume 63 Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1894. Page: 85
xi, 1023 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
CRESSWELL RANCH & CATTLE CO. V. MARTINDALE.
dale and Thomas J. Price, the defendants in error, 5,021 steers, 1,321
of which were to be delivered not later than October 20, 1892, and
the remaining 3,700 at the rate of 1,000 each week, commencing
October 24, 1892. The vendees agreed to pay $28 per head for the
cattle, and at the date of the contract paid $5,000, which was to be
applied to the payment for the cattle as they were delivered at the
rate of $1 per head. The 3,700 cattle were part of a herd of cattle
owned by the vendor that was on a range in Texas, 40 miles square,
and the contract provided that when any installment of these cattle
was ready to load upon the cars the vendees should be notified, and
might cut out any of the steers gathered that did not weigh 900
pounds. After the 1,321 cattle and two installments of the 3,700
had been delivered and paid for, making in all 2,289 steers, the
parties met on November 14, 1892, for the fourth delivery, and the
vendor tendered, and demanded that the vendees should receive, 980
steers that weighed over 900 pounds each, and that complied with
the other requirements of the contract. The vendees cut out and
refused to accept or pay for 282 of these cattle, on the ground that
they did not weigh 900 pounds each, but accepted and paid for the
remaining 698. Before the time for another delivery arrived, the
vendor notified the vendees that they had violated the contract on
their part by rejecting the 282 steers, and that the cattle company
would deliver no more cattle to them thereunder. The vendees then
brought this suit for damages for the failure of the vendor to deliver
the remainder of the cattle specified in the contract, and for the
balance of the $5,000 not yet applied to the payment for the cattle
already delivered. The vendor answered that the vendees had com-
mitted the first breach by failing to receive and pay for the 282 cat-
tle tendered November 14, 1892. At the close of the trial the
court instructed the jury, in effect, that the mere fact that the
vendees refused to accept the steers that complied with the contract
-on November 14, 1892, did not relieve the vendor of its obligation
to make tender of the remainder of the 5,021 steers due under the
contract, if the jury further found that the vendees made the re-
jection in good faith, in the belief that the rejected steers did not
come up to the requirements of the contract. The court also re-
fused to charge, as requested by the vendor, that the rejection of
these steers entitled it to treat this action as a breach of the con-
tract, and that, if the vendor notified the vendees that it so elected in
a reasonable time after the rejection, the latter could not recover.
'The court also instructed the jury that, although they found that the
vendor tendered and the vendees refused to accept cattle that ful-
filled the requirements of the contract, yet, if the vendor had subse-
quently waived that breach of the contract, the vendees could re-
cover damages for the failure of the vendor to make the subsequent
deliveries. There was a verdict and judgment for the vendees for
damages for the failure of the vendor to deliver the steers due sub-
sequent to November 14, 1892. But the jury found that the 282
steers tendered and rejected on that day fulfilled the requirements
-of the contract, and gave the vendees no damages on account of
those steers. The verdict does not disclose whether the jury found
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter. Volume 63 Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1894., legislative document, 1895; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc36388/m1/96/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.