Acme Mfg. Co. v. Arminius Chemical Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond'; Edmund Waddill, Jr., Judge. Action by the Acme Manufacturing Company against the Arminius Chemical Company. From a judgment for a less amount than demanded, plaintiff brings error.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond'; Edmund Waddill, Jr., Judge. Action by the Acme Manufacturing Company against the Arminius Chemical Company. From a judgment for a less amount than demanded, plaintiff brings error. By contract dated October 21, 1915, the defendant sold plaintiff 4,000 to 7,000 tons fines sulphur pyrites, to be shipped at the rate of approximately 500 tons per month, beginning at plaintiff’s option on or before January 1, 1916, at a price of 9% cents per unit of sulphur, delivered f. o. b. cars at…
1Opinion of the CourtPritchard, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is insisted by plaintiff that an accident, strike, or suspension clause in a contract, under circumstances analogous to the case at bar, does not justify the abrogation of such contract, but does have the effect of suspending performance only, except in cases where such accident or strike renders it impossible of ever being performed. In addition to this, however, it should be borne in mind that the defendant wrote the plaintiff a letter on August 1, 1916, in which it was stated:
“For the present we will book your orders to begin shipment on January 1,„…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Roehm v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Central Trust Co. of Ill. v. Chicago Auditorium Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Garfield & Proctor Coal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal & Coke Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Jessup & Moore Paper Co. v. PiperU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1902
- Metropolitan Coal Co. v. BillingsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Bu-Vi-Bar Petroleum Corporation v. KrowCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
- Purington Paving Brick Co. v. Metropolitan Paving Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1925
- Ranney-Davis Mercantile Co. v. Shawano Canning Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1922
- Dant & Russell, Inc. v. Grays Harbor Exportation Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- Corona Coal Co. v. Robert P. Hyams Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.