Opinion filed May 10, Heer, of the same firm, was with him on the brief for the appellants.
Opinion filed May 10, Heer, of the same firm, was with him on the brief for the appellants. This is a civil action to recover damages for breach of an oral contract for the purchase and sale of cattle. This controversy arose out of the following facts: Wendling indicated to Puls he might have some cattle for sale around the middle of August, Puls asked Wendling to call him when he decided to sell.
On August 13,Wendling called Puls and informed him he had head of cattle for sale. As a result of negotiation, the parties agreed on a price of 61 cents per pound for 98 head and 59 cents per pound on the remaining 5 head. Wendling granted the additional week, providing the same terms and conditions applied.
Puls assured him they did. Wendling rounded up the cattle and penned them on August 23,in preparation for delivery pursuant to the agreement but the defendants neither appeared, sent trucks, nor called. Wendling attempted to telephone Puls, but was advised Puls was putting up hay.
Finally on August 27,Wendling reached Puls by telephone and demanded an explanation. Puls stated he was still working on his problem of finding a place to put the cattle.
Wendling requested additional down payment and Puls refused and suggested that maybe he should sell the cattle to someone else. Wendling told Puls he would need a written release before he was free to negotiate another sale. Puls made no response to the release suggestion. On August 28,Wendling sought legal advice and was advised he should obtain a written release from Puls and Watson before reselling the cattle.
The next day Wendling could not locate Puls but was able to talk to Dr. They did not appear at the law office as requested, leaving Wendling uncertain as to their intentions. Thereafter, on September 11,Wendling caused the following notice to be served on both men: Wendling proceeded to comply with the terms of the notice.
They weighed 85, pounds. Wendling asked three qualified livestock dealers to make a bid on the cattle that same day. The market was so unstable on that date only one of the buyers made an offer. He bid 42 cents per pound. The trial court held the question of the statute of frauds was not a problem in the case because the parties had admitted through testimony the existence of the agreement, its terms and conditions.
The court held the seller in this case had a right to retain the down payment and apply it toward his damages. In addition, he held if the down payment was inadequate to cover all of his damages, Wendling could bring an action to recover his excess damages.
The court further held the tendency of modern authority was that time is not ordinarily of the essence in a contract unless made so by stipulation or unless that intent is manifested by the parties.
The court found that time was not of the essence in the contract for sale between the parties in this case. Appellants Puls and Watson appeal. In raising the issue, appellants admit the contract of sale, its terms and the proposed delivery date.Free Essay: Student: Matthew Way Case Study: Phillip Eugene Wendling, Appellee, v.
Ted Puls and George Watson, Defendants-Appellants No. 50, UNITED STATES. Way Case Study: Phillip Eugene Wendling, Appellee, v. Ted Puls and George Watson, Defendants-Appellants No. 50, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS Kan.
; P. Case Study: Phillip Eugene Wendling, Appllee V. Ted Puls and George Watson Essay. Phillip Eugene Wendling, a Harvey County farmer and stockman, told Ted Puls, an active cattle buyer, in July of that he might have some cattle for sale around the middle of that August - Case Study: Phillip Eugene Wendling, Appllee V.
Ted Puls and George Watson Essay introduction. Explain 2 types of barriers to entry which can prevent potential competitors from entering an industry Monopoly and oligopoly both are types of barriers to entry. View Essay - Case #2 from PROC at caninariojana.com Case #2 Clark, Ryan Phillip Eugene Wendling, Appellee v.
Ted Puls and George Watson, Appellants . Phillip Eugene Wendling, Appellee, v. Ted Puls and George Watson, Appellants (Case Study). A discussion of procedural history, facts, issues, answer/holdings, and reasoning and disposition for .