Conley Camera Co. v. Multiscope & Film Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota; Charles A. Willard, Judge. Action at law by the Multiscope & Film Company against the Conley Camera Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
TRIEBER, District Judge.
The plaintiff sought to recover damages for the breach of two contracts, one executed on November 20, 1907, and the other on December 2, 1908; but as the court below held that there could be no recovery on the first contract, and the cause was tried solely for the alleged breach of the second contract, the first need not be considered.
*894The complaint alleges the execution of a contract, which is as follows :
“This agreement witnesseth, that the Multiscope & Film .Company, a corporation of Wisconsin, first party, has sold and assigned, and by these presents does grant,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Joy v. St. LouisSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Willard v. TayloeSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Cold Blast Transp. Co. v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Pierce v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Loudenback Fertilizer Co. v. Tennessee Phosphate Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1903
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Claiborne-Reno Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933
- Texas Co. v. Pensacola Maritime Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1922
- Ramey Lumber Co. v. John Schroeder Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1916
- Griffin v. Oklahoma Natural Gas CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1930
- Kane v. Chrysler CorporationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1948
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.