Burroughs Adding Mach. Co. v. Scandinavian-American Bank
District Court, W.D. Washington
At Taw. Assumpsit by the Burroughs Adding Machine Company against the Scandinavian-American Bank. On plaintiff’s motion to strike a portion of the answer, or in the alternative to compel defendant to state separately its causes of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
NETERER, District Judge.
This is an action of assumpsit to recover upon written memoranda by which the defendant ordered certain adding machines. The defendant, answering, admits the execution of the memoranda, and then sajrs: That the plaintiff practiced fraud in inducing the defendant to sign the contract, in that the plaintiff made representations of facts which did not exist, which were believed by the defendant, and which moved it to enter into the contract; that the defendant is a banking concern, employs six bookkeepers and two statement men, and also operated two adding machines, used…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Smith v. RichardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- De Witt v. BerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Dowagiac Manufacturing Co. v. MahonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
- Schroeder v. Hotel Commercial Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Eastern States Petroleum Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1939
- Pennok Oil Co. v. Roxana Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1923
- Niles v. DanforthSupreme Court of Vermont · 1923
- New York Life Ins. Co. v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1934
- First Acceptance Corp. v. KennedyDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.