{
  "id": 2859521,
  "name": "C. L. Gray Lumber Company, Appellee, v. Otto Scharmer, trailing as Scharmer Construction Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "C. L. Gray Lumber Co. v. Scharmer",
  "decision_date": "1916-03-07",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,016",
  "first_page": "193",
  "last_page": "194",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "198 Ill. App. 193"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 249,
    "char_count": 2847,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.577,
    "sha256": "53fc04ff157b5010345327ed55be637663e0b3aacfb97321408dae1bf2a8ed82",
    "simhash": "1:be9b0f057c0a91ed",
    "word_count": 475
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:11:33.440984+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "C. L. Gray Lumber Company, Appellee, v. Otto Scharmer, trailing as Scharmer Construction Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Gustav E. Beerly, for appellant.",
      "Archibald Cattell, for appellee; Carl A. Waldrom, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "C. L. Gray Lumber Company, Appellee, v. Otto Scharmer, trailing as Scharmer Construction Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 22,016.\n(Hot to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. George J. Cowing, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1915.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 7, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by C. L. Gray Lumber Company, plaintiff, against Otto Scharmer, trading as the Scharmer Construction Company, defendant, for refusal by defendant to take lumber, according to an agreement, to be furnished by plaintiff. Prom a judgment in plaintiff\u2019s favor, defendant appeals.\nThere were several letters between the parties leading up to the final order of March 27, 1913, which was sued on and is as follows:\n\u201cMarch 27th, 1913.\n\u201cC. L. Gray Lumber Co.,\n\u201cMeridian, Miss.\n\u2018 \u2018 Gentlemen :\u2014\nWe herewith place an order with yon for 300,000 Ft. 3x6 at $21.50 per M. F. O. B. Cars Chicago, to be 12-14-16 feet long. This is for prospective work and we do not know the exact lengths in quantities we will need. This is to be held subject for call within six months.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Sales, \u00a7 16 \u2014when order for goods definite in terms. A letter from defendant to plaintiff ordering lumber in the light of previous letters of the parties and the testimony of witnesses, held to be definite enough to disclose a cause of action, in particulars of quantity, price, time of delivery and character of materials.\n2. Contracts, \u00a7 198*\u2014when meaning of trade terms may be explained by experts. The meaning of trade terms used in letters or contracts may always be explained by persons experienced in the particular business.\n3. Contracts, \u00a7 377*\u2014when evidence inadmissible to aid in construction of contract. Where testimony of a third person as to a conversation between plaintiff and defendant subsequent to the making of the contract sued on would corroborate defendant\u2019s testimony but would not modify, change or aid construction of such contract, it was not error to refuse admission of such testimony.\n\u201cOtto Scharmer.\n\u201cAgreed\n\u201c (Signed) C. L. G-ray Lumber Co., per\n\u201cC. L. G-ray.\n\u201cNote: Any slight difference in the amount of quantity used more or less to be adjusted at the above price. \u2019 \u2019\nThe court refused to admit the evidence of Scharmer\u2019s bookkeeper, Miss Crane, as to a conversation between Scharmer and G-ray. The alleged conversation was said to have taken place some two months after the contract was made. According to Scharmer, he only expressed doubt as to his ability to order lumber, as he was short of work.\nGustav E. Beerly, for appellant.\nArchibald Cattell, for appellee; Carl A. Waldrom, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0193-01",
  "first_page_order": 217,
  "last_page_order": 218
}