Legal Opinion
Canister Co. v. Wood & Selick, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided August 28, 1934No. 5266PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAVIS, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court entered upon a motion of defendant to strike out the amended reply of the plaintiff on the ground that its pleadings were insufficient in law to constitute a cause of action.
This action arose out of an alleged contract between the parties contained in the following letter written to the Canister Company, hereinafter called plaintiff, by Wood & Solicit, Inc., defendant:
“New York, March 29th, 1928.
“The Canister Company,
“Phillipsburg, Now Jersey.
“Gentlemen:
“We have concluded to enter into the following agreement with…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Traiman v. RappaportCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1930
- Sun P. P. Assn. v. . Remington P. P. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'n v. Remington Paper & Power Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Lucesco Oil Co. v. BrewerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Tansey v. SuckoneckSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Olympic Junior, Inc., in No. 71-1440 v. David Crystal, Inc. Appeal of Edward Defabio, in No. 71-1441. Appeal of Paul D'alessandro, in No. 71-1442Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- The Thos. J. Dyer Company v. Bishop International Engineering Company and General Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1962
- Roy v. SalisburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Caltex Oil Venture v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2012
- MacArthur v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1948
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.