Legal Opinion

Asbestos Products Corporation v. Matson

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided April 19, 1922PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeach, J.

The printed order-forms on which the action is based, contain the words: “No condition of sale, guarantee or agreement other than specified hereon.” If these forms, when filled out, had contained nothing more than the written specifications of orders for merchandise, no parol testimony of the collateral agreement would have been admissible, because each of the writings would then have contained on its face the declaration of both parties that the instrument was a complete record of the agreement actually made. When, however, the parties wrote into the first of these order-forms the words,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Collins v. TillouSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
  2. Hall v. SolomonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1892
  3. Murray v. Supreme Lodge, New England Order of ProtectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1902
  4. Brosty v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
  5. Wetherell v. HollisterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Siller v. PhilipSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
  2. Cone v. PedersenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  3. Fernandez v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
  4. Pyskoty v. SobusiakSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
  5. Reader v. GrossmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API