Leatherbee v. Bernier
65 N.E. 842, 182 Mass. 507, 1903 Mass. LEXIS 901
Opinion
The letters relied on do not show that the parties ever agreed on the terms of the alleged contract of sale. They are therefore not a sufficient memorandum to take the case out of the statute of frauds.
Exhibit B, while purporting to accept an offer, is not responsive to Exhibit A, and apparently refers to some other offer than the conditional one contained in Exhibit A. Exhibit C refers neither to Exhibit B nor Exhibit Á, and apparently refers to another oral communication. Oakman v. Rogers, 120 Mass. 214.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Leatherbee v. Bernier, 65 N.E. 842, 182 Mass. 507, 1903 Mass. LEXIS 901 (Mass. 1903).
65 N.E. 842 (Leatherbee v. Bernier) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Diebold Safe & Lock Co. v. Morse
124 N.E. 429 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1919)
Graham v. Henderson Elevator Co.
111 N.E. 332 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1916)