Cole-McIntyre-Norfleet Co. v. Holloway
Tennessee Supreme Court
214 S.W. 817 (1919)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
On March 26, 1917, a salesman employed by Cole-McIntyre-Norfleet Co. (Cole) (defendant) visited Holloway’s (plaintiff) store and successfully solicited an order from Holloway for fifty barrels of meal, a perishable good. Cole provided that Holloway had until July 31, 1917 to request delivery of the meal, and would be charged for storage of any barrels not requested by this time. Cole’s salesman visited Holloway’s store once a week every week following Holloway’s order but never mentioned the order during these visits. On May 26, 1917, Holloway requested delivery of the barrels from Cole. However, Cole informed Holloway that it had never accepted his order and thus no contract existed. Between March 26, when the order was placed, and May 26, when Holloway requested delivery, the prices for meal significantly increased. Holloway brought suit to recover the excess in price in Tennessee state court. The circuit court and court of appeals both held that Cole’s unreasonable delay in informing Holloway that it did not accept the order actually amounted to acceptance itself, and thus a valid contract was formed. Cole appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lansden, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.