Legal Opinion

Mitsubishi Goshi Kaisha v. J. Aron & Co.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 6, 1926No. 93PublishedCited by 6 opinions

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

  1. Filley v. PopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. National Bank of Commerce v. LambornCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1924

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Banco Espanol De Credito v. State Street Bank and Trust Company, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1967
  2. Printing Center of Texas, Inc. v. Supermind Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1984
  3. Ramirez v. AutosportSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
  4. Texas Imports v. Allday, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)1983
  5. D.P. Technology Corp. v. Sherwood Tool, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1990

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API