Huidekoper v. Locomotive Works
Supreme Court of the United States
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Waite
This is also an appeal from a decree upon a petition of intervention filed in the case of Fosdick and Fish against the Chicago, Danville, and Vincennes Railroad Company. On the 1st of September, 1873, the Hinckley Locomotive Works entered into a contract with the railroad company for the sale of three locomotive engines, and on the 8th of October, 1873, for the sale of two more. By the terms of these contracts, notes were to be given for the price, payable at stated periods, wdiich might be renewed if required. The title to the locomotives was to remain in the vendors until.the notes were…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Burnham v. BowenSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Southern Railway Co. v. Carnegie Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Fidelity Insurance, Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Shenandoah Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Virginia · 1889
- Illinois Trust & Savings Bank v. DoudCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
- Ryan v. HaysTexas Supreme Court · 1884
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.