Rosenblatt v. Townsley

73 Mo. 536
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedApril 15, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 73 Mo. 536 (Rosenblatt v. Townsley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rosenblatt v. Townsley, 73 Mo. 536 (Mo. 1881).

Opinion

Hough, J.

Although the prices of the articles set out in the account sued on, were agreed upon on Sunday, the contract of sale was not completed until the day following, when the goods were delivered. It cannot, therefore, be regarded as a contract made on Sunday. Lyon v. Strong, 6 Vt. 219; Adams v. Gay, 19 Vt. 358; Lovejoy v. Whipple, 18 Vt. 379; Smith v. Bean, 15 N. H. 577; Mason v. Thompson, 18 Pick. 305; Hening v. Powell, 33 Mo. 468; Fritsch v. Heislen, 40 Mo. 555; Luebbering v. Oberkoetter, 1 Mo. App. 399; Gwinn v. Simes, 61 Mo. 335; Benjamin on Sales, § 557.

The contract was, in its nature, a severable one, and the plaintiff dismissed as to the two items delivered on Sunday, although the testimony tended to show that these items were delivered only for the inspection of the lady for whom they were intended.

We see no error, materially affecting the merits of the action, in the refusal of the court to grant the defendants a? continuance. The judgment of the circuit court will be affirmed.

The other judges concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

McCullough v. Smith
243 F. 823 (Eighth Circuit, 1917)
P. J. Bowlin Liquor Co. v. Brandenburg
106 N.W. 497 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 Mo. 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenblatt-v-townsley-mo-1881.