Legal Opinion
William C. Atwater & Co. v. Terminal Coal Corp.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided December 3, 1940No. 3621PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Per curiam
In a suit for breach of contract to buy coal, the District Court, after a trial without a jury, gave judgment for the defendant. The judgment must be affirmed for the reasons fully and adequately set forth in the opinion of the District Court, 32 F. Supp. 178.
Considering the wording of the contract, the circumstances of its execution, and the subsequent conduct of the parties, we think the court below was correct in concluding that the contract required the defendant to buy, not a definite tonnage, but its requirements during the year not to exceed 150,000 tons. Defendant took some coal under…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wells v. . AlexandreNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Langel v. BetzNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Edison Electric Illuminating Co. v. ThacherNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- In Re United Cigar Stores Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- New York Central Iron Works Co. v. United States Radiator Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1903
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hml Corporation v. General Foods CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- Propane Industrial, Inc. v. General Motors Corp.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1977
- H. P. Hood & Sons v. HeinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1964
- Black v. Interstate Commerce CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1948
- Oregon Plywood Sales Corporation v. Sutherlin Plywood Corporation and Nordic Plywood, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.