Legal Opinion
Scotton v. Wright
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Decided May 12, 1922PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
A question is first made as to parties. The covenant having been made with George P. Scotton individually, has the firm of George P. Scotton, George C. Scotton and *219Lyman J. Scotton, trading as George P. Scotton & Sons, and also trading as Smyrna Nash Motors Company, any right to relief because of breach thereof?
The covenant in terms is in favor of George P. Scotton, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns. There is no evidence showing a formal assignment by the convenantee of the benefits of the covenant to the partnership. It is admitted, however, that when George P.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- McLean v. FlemingSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Menendez v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Saxlehner v. Eisner & Mendelson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- My Laundry Co. v. SchmelingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
- Swanson v. KirbySupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Schnucks Twenty-Five, Inc. v. BettendorfMissouri Court of Appeals · 1979
- Bay Newfoundland v. Wilson Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1939
- Cheese Shop International, Inc. v. SteeleSupreme Court of Delaware · 1973
- Mackenzie Oil Co. v. Omar Oil & Gas Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1923
- Tull v. TurekSupreme Court of Delaware · 1958
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.