Salary Vs. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company
JOHN SALSBURY v. NORTH WESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
Citation: 221 N.W.2d 609 _1974
Issue
The case was an appeal lodged by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company against the appellee, John Salsbury. The plaintiff, Salsbury had been involved in the efforts to establish Charles City College. A subscription for funding was solicited from Northwestern Bell Telephone Company (defendant) by Peter Bruno. Daryl V. Winder, the defendant's office manager conveyed the request to his superiors who gave their consent. However at the time the consent was given Winder did not have pledge form on hand. He resulted to writing to Bruno informing him that the defendant contribution of $15000 to be made over a three year period had been approved by the District Manager for Mason City; E. A. McDaniel,. …show more content…
In its place a pledge card was typed in to reflect the $15000 but was never signed by the defendant. It was a copy of this pledge card that was forwarded in connection of the assignment to supplier. In an effort to gain credit from the supplier, the plaintiff executed a personal guaranty. The obligation was secured through subscribed pledges. These pledges were than assigned to American Acceptance Corporation of Philadelphia, by the supplier. Then American Acceptance Corporation assigned the pledges to the plaintiff after settling it with him. All this was done without ever showing or giving a copy of the letter. According to the plaintiff, he had no knowledge of the letter and acted believing the defendant was obligated in the same manner as those who executed pledge cards. The legal question before the court in this third appeal case was whether defendant was bound to pay his subscription by reason of the letter. The trial court had held that the letter bound the sender to contractual
Citation: 221 N.W.2d 609 _1974
Issue
The case was an appeal lodged by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company against the appellee, John Salsbury. The plaintiff, Salsbury had been involved in the efforts to establish Charles City College. A subscription for funding was solicited from Northwestern Bell Telephone Company (defendant) by Peter Bruno. Daryl V. Winder, the defendant's office manager conveyed the request to his superiors who gave their consent. However at the time the consent was given Winder did not have pledge form on hand. He resulted to writing to Bruno informing him that the defendant contribution of $15000 to be made over a three year period had been approved by the District Manager for Mason City; E. A. McDaniel,. …show more content…
In its place a pledge card was typed in to reflect the $15000 but was never signed by the defendant. It was a copy of this pledge card that was forwarded in connection of the assignment to supplier. In an effort to gain credit from the supplier, the plaintiff executed a personal guaranty. The obligation was secured through subscribed pledges. These pledges were than assigned to American Acceptance Corporation of Philadelphia, by the supplier. Then American Acceptance Corporation assigned the pledges to the plaintiff after settling it with him. All this was done without ever showing or giving a copy of the letter. According to the plaintiff, he had no knowledge of the letter and acted believing the defendant was obligated in the same manner as those who executed pledge cards. The legal question before the court in this third appeal case was whether defendant was bound to pay his subscription by reason of the letter. The trial court had held that the letter bound the sender to contractual