Legal Opinion
Wildberg Box Co. v. Darby
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1919PublishedCited by 10 opinions
FROM SHELBY. Appeal from the Chancery Court of Shelby County.— Hon. I. H. Peres, Chancellor.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKinney
This is a suit to recover damages for the breach of a contract by which the defendant, Darby, sold and agreed *75to deliver to the complainant, Wildberg Box Company, 300,000 feet of gum lumber. The contract is contained in two letters as follows:
“October 31, 1917.
“H. W. Dlarby Hardwood Lumber Company, G-renada, Miss. — Gentlemen: ... If you can guarantee a genuine article (Tupelo gum), we would be willing to place an order with you for 300,000 feet, shipment to start as soon as your stock is dry, and subject to a sample car to show grade and texture, at $24 f. o. b. Cincinnati, for 4/4 No. 2…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Norrington v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Lowy v. RosengrantSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Ross-Meehan Foundry Co. v. Royer Wheel Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1904
- Garrison v. NewtonWashington Supreme Court · 1917
- Mann v. MaurelAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1911
3Cited by10 opinions
- Tennessee Fertilizer Co. v. International Agr. Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1921
- Lamborn & Co. v. Green & GreenTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- Petway v. Loew's Nashville Knoxville CorporationCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1938
- Yours Truly Biscuit Co. v. Chas. H. Lilly Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1927
- Calcasieu Paper Co., Inc. v. Memphis Paper Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.