Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Story
December 30, 1930
The Milwaukee Leader
Milwaukee, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin
What is this article about?
Buyer Bill Rimps writes and signs an order on a manufacturer's pad after inspecting samples, but the court rules against him in his lawsuit for non-delivery, as he cannot claim the firm's printed name without authority.
Clipping
OCR Quality
98%
Excellent
Full Text
You're the JUDGE
Bill Rimps, the buyer of a certain line of goods, after inspecting the samples in the salesroom of a certain manufacturer, borrowed an order pad from one of the employes in the room. The order pad contained the name of the firm printed at the top and had lines drawn across for the various items, price and lots. Rimps looked around once again and then wrote on the order pad various items of the goods he saw at the prices marked, signed it, and handed the sheets to the employe who loaned him the pad. The employe returned the carbon copy marked the original to keep. Rimps then left. But no goods were sent. Rimps waited a while and still none came. So he wrote the manufacturer citing the order, and when the manufacturer seemed to ignore it completely, Rimps filed suit against him.
How would you decide this case?
Make up your mind before you read the decision.
The decision:
The court held against Rimps.
The judges reasoned thus:
True, the printed name at the top of the order blank is the same as the signature to a written order, but the written order must be that of the person owning the signature or one of his agents. Here the writing was done by Mr. Rimps. This was as though he were trying to appropriate the printed signature which, of course, he could not do.
Bill Rimps, the buyer of a certain line of goods, after inspecting the samples in the salesroom of a certain manufacturer, borrowed an order pad from one of the employes in the room. The order pad contained the name of the firm printed at the top and had lines drawn across for the various items, price and lots. Rimps looked around once again and then wrote on the order pad various items of the goods he saw at the prices marked, signed it, and handed the sheets to the employe who loaned him the pad. The employe returned the carbon copy marked the original to keep. Rimps then left. But no goods were sent. Rimps waited a while and still none came. So he wrote the manufacturer citing the order, and when the manufacturer seemed to ignore it completely, Rimps filed suit against him.
How would you decide this case?
Make up your mind before you read the decision.
The decision:
The court held against Rimps.
The judges reasoned thus:
True, the printed name at the top of the order blank is the same as the signature to a written order, but the written order must be that of the person owning the signature or one of his agents. Here the writing was done by Mr. Rimps. This was as though he were trying to appropriate the printed signature which, of course, he could not do.
What sub-type of article is it?
Deception Fraud
Mystery
Crime Story
What themes does it cover?
Deception
Justice
Crime Punishment
What keywords are associated?
Order Pad
Fraudulent Order
Legal Suit
Court Decision
Signed Order
What entities or persons were involved?
Bill Rimps
The Manufacturer
The Employe
Where did it happen?
Salesroom Of A Certain Manufacturer
Story Details
Key Persons
Bill Rimps
The Manufacturer
The Employe
Location
Salesroom Of A Certain Manufacturer
Story Details
Bill Rimps inspects samples, borrows an order pad, writes and signs an order for goods at marked prices, hands it to the employee who keeps the original; no goods sent, Rimps sues, but court holds against him as he cannot appropriate the printed firm name by signing himself.