D. A. Tompkins Co. v. Monticello Cotton Oil Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Georgia
In Equity.
1Opinion of the Court
SPEER, District Judge.
The complainant, the D. A. Tompkins Company, entered into a contract to furnish the machinery for the mill of the defendant, the Monticello Cotton Oil Company. It was expressly agreed that the machinery should be installed by September 15, 1902. The defendant was about to engage in what to it was a new enterprise, namely, the manufacture of the products of cotton seed. Because it was necessary to buy seed for the purpose of manufacture at the time when the gathering of the cotton crop made such seed available, the date of installation of the machinery was an essential…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Howard v. Stillwell & Bierce Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Warren v. StoddartSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Abbott v. GatchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1859
- Van Winkle & Co. v. WilkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Stewart v. Lanier House Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Camilla Cotton Oil Company and George M. Perry, Sr. v. Spencer Kellogg and Sons, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1958
- Consolidated Phosphate Co. v. Sturtevant Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- Inman & Co. v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Georgia · 1908
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. ShoreCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- Williams Manufacturing Co. v. Schofield's Sons Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.