Abbott v. Gilchrist

Decided July 1, 1854

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1854-07-01

On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Appleton, J., presiding. Assumpsit to recover half of the contract price of a vessel frame. The evidence showed a parol contract to deliver the timber for a vessel frame, of which plaintiff was to furnish one half, to be hewn and prepared according to certain moulds. The timber was delivered according to the contract.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1896

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1854-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Shepley, C. J.

¶1— Whether the requested instructions should have been given, will be determined by ascertaining whether the contract between the parties was within the prohibitions contained in the statute of frauds, c. 136, § 4.

¶2It appears to have been a contract to procure and deliver at a certain time and place, one half of a frame for a vessel, to be hewn and fashioned according to certain moulds.

¶3The distinction between contracts for the sale of goods, and contracts to furnish articles to be manufactured or prepared in a prescribed manner, was stated in the case of Hight v. Ripley, 19 Maine, 137.

¶4Contracts of the latter kind are not within the statute; and of this kind the contract between these parties appears tQ have been. Exceptions overruled.

Tenney, Howard and Hathaway, J. J., concurred.