Legal Opinion

Terminal Trading Co. v. Babbit

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1941No. 27934PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, C. J.

This is an action sounding in contract. The plaintiff sued for the price of goods sold and delivered. The defendants were held liable, although they did not order the goods, nor receive them, nor agree to pay for them. Neither did the plaintiff seller invoice the goods to them nor look to them for payment at the time they were furnished. It is, therefore, evident that the essentials of a legal contract were completely lacking, and that it was incumbent upon the plaintiff, in order to recover, to establish facts which would, in equity and good conscience, require the court to create and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Taylor v. Davis' AdministratrixSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Austin v. . MunroNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  3. New v. . NicollNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  4. Roger Williams National Bank v. Groton Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1889
  5. Laun-Dry-Ette Sales Co. v. FieldingCity of New York Municipal Court · 1922

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lake Air, Inc. v. DuffyWashington Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Copeland Planned Futures, Inc. v. ObenchainCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1973
  3. Condon v. CondonWashington Supreme Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API