Case ID: ill-app_209/html/0426-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

George E. Ford, Appellant, v. M. Piowaty & Sons, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 23,084. (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Sales, § 329
      
      —when evidence insufficient to sustain judgment for plaintiff in action for purchase price. In an action to recover the purchase price of perishable goods sold for delivery at another city,, where the judgment for plaintiff was based on the theory of plaintiff’s neglect to give notice of the shipment and arrival of the goods and defendant’s right to recoup the difference between the purchase price and what the goods actually sold for, evidence held insufficient to show that defendant was diligent in minimizing the loss included in the payment.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. D. H. Wamslby, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed January 31, 1918.
    Rehearing denied February 11, 1918.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by George E. Ford, plaintiff, against M. Piowaty & Sons, a corporation, defendant, to recover the purchase price of goods sold. From judgment against defendant for $30.45, plaintiff appeals.
    Stewart Reed Brown, for appellant.
    Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellee; Charles B. Stafford, of counsel.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.