Legal Opinion

Roth Shoe Mfg. Co. v. Kartus

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided April 8, 1924No. 6 Div. 380PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.

This action is grounded upon the breach of a contract, entered into by and between the parties, for the sale and purchase of a lot of shoes, to be manufactured by plaintiff for defendant. The contract was proven, the refusal to comply on the part of defendant, and the amount of damages. The defendant by way of defense, through and by a plea, “in short by consent,” alleges fraud on the part of plaintiff’s salesman in obtaining the contract, in that the the salesman fraudulently misrepresented the contents of the contract and' relying upon this statement and without reading the contract…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Arndt v. City of CullmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
  2. Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
  3. Southern Railway Co. v. HobbsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
  4. Carter v. FulghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901
  5. Moses v. Katzenberger & SonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Alabama Power Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
  2. Standard Oil Co. v. MyersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
  3. Commercial Jewelry Co. v. BraczykCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API