Legal Opinion

Schenley Distillers Corporation v. Renken

District Court, E.D. South Carolina

Decided August 26, 1940PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WYCHE, District Judge.

The complaint herein states a cause of action for debt. The answer contains a general denial, claims of offset and a counterclaim for damages. The reply of plaintiff, as a second defense, sets forth “that there was no memorandum in writing signed by the party to be charged, to wit, the plaintiff in this action, of any such contract as alleged in the counterclaim herein and that there being no such memorandum, the same is in violation of what is commonly known as the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries and that this plaintiff does plead said Statute in connection with this…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Harrison v. PereaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. Deyo v. . HudsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  3. Dawe v. MorrisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
  4. McCusker v. GeigerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  5. Palmetto Bank & Trust Co. v. GrimsleySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Stewart v. Arrington Construction CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Hunt v. Mobil Oil CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1975
  3. Gilbert v. Eli Lilly & Co.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1972
  4. General Corporation v. General Motors CorporationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1960
  5. Meridith v. MassieCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1943

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