Legal Opinion

Texaco, Inc. v. Rogow

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 8, 1963PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKing, J.

The plaintiff, Texaco, Inc., sought specific performance of a contract to sell certain premises leased to it by the defendant. It claimed to have exercised, at a price of $16,000, an option to purchase which was contained in the lease. The defendant, in his answer and counterclaim, denied that the plaintiff had any right to exercise any option at $16,000, alleged that the plaintiff had in fact exercised an option to purchase the premises for $44,000, and sought, by way of counterclaim, specific performance of the plaintiff’s alleged agreement to purchase the property at the latter figure.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Sturtevant v. SturtevantSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
  2. Ives v. City of WillimanticSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
  3. Connecticut Co. v. DIVISION 425Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
  4. Butler v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1948
  5. Shell Oil Co. v. BlumbergCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1946

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Heyman v. CBS, INC.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
  2. Texaco, Inc. v. CreelSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  3. Lanna v. GreeneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
  4. Smith v. Hevro Realty Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
  5. Bobali Corp. v. Tamapa Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975

37 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