Mitsubishi Goshi Kaisha v. J. Aron & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtHand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The buyer promised to-pay only “against shipping documents,”' which were to be “f. o. b. seller’s tank cars, Pacific Coast.” This required the tender of a bill of lading acknowledging delivery to a. common carrier at some point selected by the-buyer on the Pacific Coast, in this instance Seattle. Nothing but such a bill of lading was a performance of the condition upon that promise. Filley v. Pope, 115 U. S. 213, 6 S. Ct. 19, 29 L. Ed. 372; National Bank of Commerce v. Lamborn, 2 F.(2d) 23, 36 A.L.R. 509 (C. C. A. 4).
There is no room in commercial contracts…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Filley v. PopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- National Bank of Commerce v. LambornCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1924
3Cited by6 opinions
- Banco Espanol De Credito v. State Street Bank and Trust Company, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1967
- Printing Center of Texas, Inc. v. Supermind Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1984
- Ramirez v. AutosportSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
- Texas Imports v. Allday, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)1983
- D.P. Technology Corp. v. Sherwood Tool, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1990
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.