Bayer Steam Soot Blower Co. v. W. G. Cornell Co.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
ITkari.xg on an appeal l>v the plaintiff from a judgment of ibe ¡Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia in an action to recover tbe purchase price of machinery sold by tbe plaintiff to the defendant. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
]\Ir. Chief Justice Smyth
delivered the opinion of the Court:
Plaintiff, Bayer Steam Soot Blower Company, sued to recover the contract: price of two patented soot blowers for cleaning the soot and ashes from between the tubes of a steam boiler. There were affidavits of merit on behalf of plaintiff and affidavits in defense by the defendant, W. C. Cornell Company. The parties agreed that, if the trial court was of the opinion that the affidavits in defense wore sufficient, the court should enter judgment for the defendant, reserving to plaintiff the right to appeal. Another stipulation says that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Boothby v. ScalesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- McClure Bros. v. BriggsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1886
- Scott v. MaierMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Lockwood Manufacturing Co. v. Mason Regulator Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Silsby Manuf'g Co. v. Town of ChicoUnited States Circuit Court · 1885
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Henson Creek Development Corp. v. RichardsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1969