Connell Bros. v. H. Diederichsen & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the United States Court for China; Rufus H. Thayer, Judge. Action by H. Diederichsen & Co. against the Connell Bros. Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
DIETRICH, District Judge.
This case comes here by writ of error from the United States Court for China, for the review of a judgment against the plaintiff in error, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, for the amount of $3,830.89 and costs. The pleadings are the petition or complaint and the defendant’s answer thereto. The petition alleges that the plaintiff, H. Diederichsen & Co., is a German firm or company, doing business at Chefoo and Shanghai, China, and elsewhere; that *739on or about the 17th day of October, 1911, it entered into a written contract, whereby it purchased from the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Norrington v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Cleveland Rolling Mill v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- A. M. Gilman & Co. v. CosgroveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Bort v. E. H. McCutchen & Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1911
3Cited by12 opinions
- LeRoy Dyal Co. v. AllenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- Sunshine Cloak & Suit Co. v. Roquette Bros.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Weinstein v. LaughlinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1927
- Dorrance v. Barber & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
- Oxley v. Southland Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.