Stovall v. McCutchen
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 94 — INJUNCTION IN RESTRAINT OP VIOLATION OP 'A CONTRACT APPEAL FROM LOSAN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The paper sued on has none of the essential elements of a contract and is so uncertain that from its terms it is impossible to determine the meaning or intent of the parties. 2. To supply the alleged omission, to-wit, “in the evening,” and “that they can open their stores on Saturday nights,” still does not invest the paper with such elements as are demanded by a contract. 3.…
Read the full summary
Case 94 — INJUNCTION IN RESTRAINT OP VIOLATION OP 'A CONTRACT APPEAL FROM LOSAN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The paper sued on has none of the essential elements of a contract and is so uncertain that from its terms it is impossible to determine the meaning or intent of the parties. 2. To supply the alleged omission, to-wit, “in the evening,” and “that they can open their stores on Saturday nights,” still does not invest the paper with such elements as are demanded by a contract. 3. The paper is a mere nudum pactum. 4 An injunction is not the proper remedy. Citations: Hooker v. Vandewater, 47 Am. Dec.,…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE WHITE
delivered the opinion of the court.
In May, 1895, appellant and appellees, all merchants of Russellville, signed an agreement as follows:
“We, the undersigned, merchants of Russellville, do hereby agree and obligate ourselves to close our place of business at 6:30 o’clock, beginning May 15th, 1895, and lasting until the first of September,”
*579The pleadings and proof all agree that the intention of this writing was that the stores were to be closed at 6:30 p. m. of each day during the time specified, except on Saturdays.
After compliance for a few evenings after the 15th of May, appellant…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hamer v. . SidwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Sutton v. HeadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1887
- Talbott v. Stemmons' Ex'rCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1889
- Overstreet v. PhilipsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1822
3Cited by15 opinions
- Local Union No. 189, Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen v. Jewel Tea Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Batman v. Louisville Gas & Electric Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
- Vandalia Coal Co. v. LawsonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1909
- Cincinnati, Bluffton & Chicago Railroad v. WallIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
- Illinois Central Railroad v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.