Summary
In Julian C. Cohen Salvage Corp. v. Eastern Electric SalesCo., 205 Pa. Super. 26, 206 A.2d 331 (Pa. 1965), the Court considered whether a buyer of cable had effectively notified the seller of its rejection under UCC § 2-602.
Summary of this case from Southern Steel Co. v. Burton Block Con. Co.Opinion
December 17, 1964.
January 15, 1965.
Contracts — Execution — Evidence — Statute of Frauds — Sufficiency of writing — Sales order signed by buyer — Goods received and accepted by buyer.
In an action of assumpsit, in which it appeared that, following a telephone conversation between plaintiff and defendant, defendant's employe came to plaintiff's plant and examined electric cable which plaintiff had for sale; that thereafter there was a second telephone conversation between the parties, in which, plaintiff alleged, the parties entered into a contract by which plaintiff agreed to sell and defendant to buy the cable, but defendant contended that the parties agreed only that the cable was to be shipped to defendant, who was to examine it and purchase only that quantity it determined it could use; that plaintiff introduced into evidence a written sales order, which was admittedly signed by an authorized agent of defendant; and that the court, below finding that the parties had entered into a contract for the sale of the cable, and holding that the Statute of Frauds did not bar recovery by plaintiff, in that the sales order signed by defendant was a sufficient writing to satisfy the requirements of the statute, and that the goods had been received and accepted by defendant, dismissed defendant's exceptions to the findings and verdict of the trial judge, sitting without a jury; it was Held that the judgment of the court below should be affirmed.
Before ERVIN, WRIGHT, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ. (RHODES, P.J., and WOODSIDE, J., absent).
Appeal, No. 99, Oct. T., 1965, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Philadelphia County, June T., 1963, No. 4638, in case of Julian C. Cohen Salvage Corporation v. Eastern Electric Sales Company. Judgment affirmed.
Same case in court below: 34 Pa. D. C. 2d 705.
Assumpsit. Before DOTY, J., without a jury.
Findings and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appealed.
A. Martin Herring, with him Teitelman and Herring, for appellant.
Samuel Kravitz, with him Ronald I. Kravitz, for appellee.
Argued December 17, 1964.
The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Philadelphia County is affirmed on the opinion of Judge ETHAN ALLEN DOTY for the court below, reported at 34 Pa. D. C.2d 705.