Luhrig Coal Co. v. Jones & Adams Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. The Jones & Adams Company, defendant in error, a dealer in coal at Chicago, brought this suit against the Luhrig Coal Company, the plaintiff in error, a proprietor of coal mines at Luhrig, Ohio, to recover damages for the breach by the latter of the contract following: “This agreement made this 31st day of May, A. D. 1902, by and between the Jones & Adams Company, a corporation of the state…
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. The Jones & Adams Company, defendant in error, a dealer in coal at Chicago, brought this suit against the Luhrig Coal Company, the plaintiff in error, a proprietor of coal mines at Luhrig, Ohio, to recover damages for the breach by the latter of the contract following: “This agreement made this 31st day of May, A. D. 1902, by and between the Jones & Adams Company, a corporation of the state of Illinois, party of the first part, and the Luhrig Coal Company, a corporation of the state of Ohio, party of the…
1Opinion of the CourtSeverens, Circuit Judge
It seems preferable to consider first the rulings of the trial court upon the question of the legality of the stipulation contained in clause 5 of the contract, concerning the manner in which the coal should be prepared for delivery. Generally a question of this sort is one appearing upon the face of the contract, and is one for the court. But sometimes it may be necessary, in order to determine the meaning of the parties, to resort to facts in pais, to be ascertained from evidence of extraneous circumstances. The court below evidently regarded this-case as belonging to the latter class, and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- McMullen v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Tennessee v. WhitworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- O'BRIEN v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Daniel Boardman and Others, in Error v. The Lessees of Reed and Ford, M'call and Others, in ErrorSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- Canal Co. v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Nicoll v. Pittsvein Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- Consolidation Coal Co. v. Peninsular Portland Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921
- Indiana Flooring Co. v. Grand Rapids Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1927
- St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. StoneSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908
- Davison Chemical Co. v. Baugh Chemical Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1919
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.