Legal Opinion

Cockley Milling Co. v. Bunn

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 1906No. 9626Published

Error to the Circuit Court of Knox County. The case is stated in the opinion. ■

1Opinion of the CourtSummers, J.

The Milling Company, a corporation, contracted with the defendant’s decedent for four cars of oats, three to be delivered in the month of July and one in the month of August, 1901. But one car was delivered. The Milling Company sued for and recovered the difference between the selling price and the market price at the time for delivery. The contract was made by conversation, by telephone, between the general manager, who was also the secretary and treasurer, of the Milling Company and the defendant’s decedent. The court of common pleas overruled an objection to the competency of the general…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Potter v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Ullman v. Brunswick Title Guarantee & Loan Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1895
  3. Owens v. Owens's Adm'rWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1878
  4. St. John v. LoflandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
  5. In re Will of BruendlWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899

7 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