Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. H. Neuer Glass Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio; Howard C. Hollister, Judge. Action at law by the H. Neuer Glass Company against the Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
KNAPPEN, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff in error, whom we shall call defendant, was a manufacturer of glass at Pittsburgh, and liad a warehouse at Cincinnati, where it kept on hand for sale quantities of glass of various sizes. Defendani in error, plaintiff below, was a Cincinnati jobber of glass. Plaintiff sued on an alleged contract, dated January 3, 1916, taking the form of a letter to plaintiff from defendant, and signed by it, as follows:
*162“In accordance’with our personal conversation, we have entered your order for polished plate glass, for anything we can furnish from our warehouse, these…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Loudenback Fertilizer Co. v. Tennessee Phosphate Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1903
- Crane v. C. Crane & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1901
- Marx v. American Malting Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- Leo Austrian & Co. v. SpringerMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Lima Locomotive & Machine Co. v. National Steel Castings Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1907
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Moon Motor Car Co. of New York v. Moon Motor Car Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- Mills-Morris Co. v. Champion Spark Plug Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1925
- Robertson v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Imperial Refining Co. v. Kanotex Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- Jenkins v. the City Ice and Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1935
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.