Legal Opinion

Dodsworth v. Hercules Iron Works

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 5, 1895No. 191PublishedCited by 18 opinions

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western Division of the Southern District of Ohio. This was an action upon a written contract by the Hercules Iron Works against Caleb Dodsworth arid others, in which the plaintiff obtained judgment. 57 Fed. 556. From this judgment, the defendants have sued out a writ of error.

Read the full summary

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western Division of the Southern District of Ohio. This was an action upon a written contract by the Hercules Iron Works against Caleb Dodsworth arid others, in which the plaintiff obtained judgment. 57 Fed. 556. From this judgment, the defendants have sued out a writ of error. In February, 1890, the Hercules Iron Works, a corporation of the state of Illinois, contracted to construct and erect for tbé defendants, Caleb Dodswortb and others, as partners, a machine and appurtenances for the production of ice, of the Hercules pattern and…

1Opinion of the CourtBurton, Circuit Judge

The petition declared on the written contract. It alleged, as required by good pleading, that the plaintiff had fully performed the contract. This the plaintiff should aver, or, in the alternative, a willingness and readiness to perform, but for some conduct of the defendants sufficient in law to excuse; performance1. The plaintiff’s reply to the defendants’ answer admitted that a force pump had not been furnished, but, as an excuse, averred that it had been emitted at the special reepiest and instance of the defendants, and that its value was to be deducted fre>m the contract prie:e\ Upon…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Swain v. SeamansSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  2. Fleming v. GilbertNew York Supreme Court · 1808
  3. Underwood v. WolfIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Brown v. . FosterNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
  5. Moore v. MeachamNew York Court of Appeals · 1851

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Kauffman v. RaederCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
  2. City of Findlay v. PertzCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
  3. Smiley v. BarkerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
  4. City of St. Charles v. StookeyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  5. Springfield Milling Co. v. Barnard & Leas Manuf'g Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897

13 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