The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 272: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States and the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, June-August, 1921. Page: 49
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
CARROLL V. MELVILLE SHOE CORPORATION 4
defendants received was nitrate of soda belonging to the government,
and stolen from the government, and not some other substance. This
issue thus submitted to the jury was the only real issue made by the
testimony for the defendants, namely, whether the substance received
on the cars by the defendants was nitrate of soda--not whether it was
inferior nitrate of soda. If the defendant wished a more specific in-
struction that they would not be liable if nitrate of soda stolen from
the government had been taken from the cars and another substance
substituted, they should have asked for it.
 There was not a particle of evidence in the record indicating that
nitrate of soda of any kind would have a deleterious effect on vegeta-
tion used in the way described by the defendants, and the reference
in the charge to inferior or deleterious nitrate of soda was entirely ir-
relevant and harmless.
 The request of the defendants to charge that the government
was entitled to recover only the actual value of the goods was also
irrelevant. There was no dispute as to the value of nitrate of soda. If
the defendants received the nitrate of soda belonging to the govern-
ment, they were liable for the value so proved. If they did not re-
ceive nitrate of soda, they were not liable at all.
The court having fairly submitted to the jury the only substantial
issue, whether the defendants received nitrate of soda stolen from the
government in the quantities charged in the declarations, and the value
of nitrate of soda having been proved beyond dispute, there is no
foundation for the assignments of error in the charge.
CARROLL v. MELVILLE SHOE CORPORATION.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. February 23, 1921.)
Sales =1(4)-Blanket orders for manufacture of shoes held contracts when
Blanket orders for Shoes, to be filled several months, later given by a
dealer to a manufacturer and accepted, which specified the styles of shoes
and the kind of leather, number of pairs, and price of each style, celd
to constitute binding contracts, though the sizes and widths were left to
be specified later, in accordance with the custom of the trade.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern
District of New York.
Action by Robert D. V. Carroll, trustee in bankruptcy of the Mac-
donald & Kiley Company, against the Melville Shoe Corporation.
Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.
This is an action brought by the trustee in bankruptcy of the Macdonald
& Kiley Company, a corporation organized under the laws of West Virginia,
and having a place of business in the city of Cincinnati, in the state of Ohio.
The defendant is a corporation existing under the laws of the state of New
York and having its principal office in the Southern district of New York. The
complaint alleges that between June 1. 1916, and November 1 of the same
::For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Here’s what’s next.
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 with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 272: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States and the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, June-August, 1921., legislative document, 1921; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38843/m1/71/: accessed July 28, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.