Green v. American Cotton Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Tennessee
At Daw. On demurrer to amended declaration. Damages for breach of two contracts. In the one plaintiffs agreed to use defendant’s patented compress for making round lap cotton bales. In the other defendant agreed, at fixed graded prices, to buy all the cotton compressed by the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
At Daw. On demurrer to amended declaration. Damages for breach of two contracts. In the one plaintiffs agreed to use defendant’s patented compress for making round lap cotton bales. In the other defendant agreed, at fixed graded prices, to buy all the cotton compressed by the plaintiffs. Among numerous stipulations carefully regulating these dealings was one for that classification of the cotton upon which the prices to be paid depended, and, if the parties disagreed about this classification. it was to be submitted to arbitration, as provided in the stipulation. There was no express…
1Opinion of the Court
IíAMMOND, J.
(after stating the facts). The averment in the amended declaration that the plaintiff offered to arbitrate as provided *744in the contract, and that the defendant company refused, is overlooked by the demurrer and the argument. That, of itself, results in '.overruling it.
But, apart from this, it should be overruled. It is conceded that the contract does not in terms prohibit the bringing of a suit until arbitration has been- had or offered, but it is contended that such is the ’necessary implication from the contract. The argument in favor .of such an implication is one which only…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- The State of Rhode Island v. the State of MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Hawkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Hamilton v. Home InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Hudson Canal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1869
- The ExcelsiorSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Loyalton Electric Light Co. v. California Pine Box & Lumber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
- Black v. Richfield Oil Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 1941
- Wilson & Co. v. CurlettCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1922
- United Autographic Register Co. v. WightCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1921
- Amalgamated Gum Co. v. Casein Co. of AmericaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1906