Corbett v. Winston Elkhorn Coal Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtDonahue, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1-4] It is claimed upon the part of the coal company that the contract of November 28, 1919, was not a contract for the sale and purchase of coal, but merely a sales agency contract. The first paragraph of this contract read as follows:
“E. J. Corbett, Detroit, Mich., agrees to buy from the Winston Elkhorn Coal Company, of Kegina, Ky., and Winston Elkhorn Coal Company agrees to sell to E. J. Corbett the output of Kewanee and Winright mines.”
Courts do not make contracts for parties, and it is a rule of construction that, where the language used in a contract…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Warmath v. O'DanielCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908
- Toledo Computing Scale Co. v. Computing Scale Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1906
- Audit Co. of New York v. City of LouisvilleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1911
3Cited by15 opinions
- University City, Mo. v. Home Fire & Marine Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
- Canadian Nat. Ry. Co. v. George M. Jones Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1928
- O'CONNOR v. Great Lakes Pipe Line Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- Peoples Sav. Bank v. American Surety Co.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1936
- Columbia Gas Const. Co. v. HolbrookCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1936
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.