American Cotton Oil Co. v. Kirk
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. This is an action brought by Jamos A. Kirk and others, partners, doing busi - ness at Chicago, against the American Cotton Oil Company, a corporation of Ohio, doing business at Cincinnati, to recover damages for the nondelivery of a certain quantity of cotton-seed oil according to contract.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. This is an action brought by Jamos A. Kirk and others, partners, doing busi - ness at Chicago, against the American Cotton Oil Company, a corporation of Ohio, doing business at Cincinnati, to recover damages for the nondelivery of a certain quantity of cotton-seed oil according to contract. The declaration set out the contract substantially as the plaintiffs’ evidence tended on the trial to show it, as follows: “That the plaintiffs, at the request of the defendant, bargained with the defendant to buy…
1Opinion of the CourtBunn, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). There are several questions presented by the record in íhe (tase, but wo have found it necessary to determine but one, and ilmt is whether the contraed as alleged in (lie declaration testified to by the plaintiffs, and found by the jury, is a valid contract for the sale and delivery of 10,000 barrels of oil, or is it invalid for want of mutuality in its provisions? A promise on the part of the defendant io sell and deliver 10,000 barrels, without a corresponding agreement on the part of the plaintiffs to purchase and receive it, would dearly he' void for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- National Furnace Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1884
- Davie v. Lumberman's Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Dorsey v. PackwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Houston & Texas Central Railway Co. v. MitchellTexas Supreme Court · 1873
- Wilkinson v. HeavenrichMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Cold Blast Transp. Co. v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Loudenback Fertilizer Co. v. Tennessee Phosphate Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1903
- A. Santaella & Co. v. Otto F. Lange Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Fitzgerald v. First Nat. Bank of Rapid CityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Wickham & Burton Coal Co. v. Farmers Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.