Roehm v. Horst
Supreme Court of the United States
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. This was an action for breach of four certain contracts, brought by Paul E. G. Horst and others against John Koehm in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in January, 1897, and was tried under a stipulation, waiving a . jury, before Dallas, Circuit Judge, who made a special finding of facts, and, on the facts so found, gave judgment for plaintiffs. 84 Fed.
Read the full summary
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. This was an action for breach of four certain contracts, brought by Paul E. G. Horst and others against John Koehm in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in January, 1897, and was tried under a stipulation, waiving a . jury, before Dallas, Circuit Judge, who made a special finding of facts, and, on the facts so found, gave judgment for plaintiffs. 84 Fed. Rep. 565. . The case was carried by defendant to the Circuit Court of Appeals for' the Third Circuit, and the judgment of the Circuit…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Fullee
It is conceded that the contracts set out in the finding of facts were four of ten simultaneous contracts, for one hundred bales each, covering the furnishing of one thousand bales of hops during a period of five years, of which six hundred bales had been delivered and paid for. If the transaction could be treated as amounting to a single contract for one thousand bales, the breach alleged would have occurred while the contract was in the course of performance ; but plaintiffs’ declaration or statement of demand averred the execution of the four contracts, “ two for the purchase and sale of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Anvil Mining Co. v. HumbleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Pierce v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Dingley v. OlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Lovell v. St. Louis Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Hinckley v. Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1887
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by476 opinions
- Canderm Pharmacal, Ltd. v. Elder Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Franconia Associates v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Central Trust Co. of Ill. v. Chicago Auditorium Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Brownell Combs, Ii, Administrator C.T.A. Of the Estate of Leslie Combs, Ii, Deceased v. International Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Dunbar v. DunbarSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
471 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.