Legal Opinion

Tate-Jones & Co. v. Union Electric Steel Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 13, 1924No. Appeal, 80PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Sadler,

On February 28,1920, Tate-Jones & Co., Inc., plaintiff, proposed to sell to defendant, for a stipulated price, six furnaces to be used for heating and annealing steel, and its offer was accepted. The seller guaranteed the equipment “to perform the work for which it was intended,” and that the plant would “maintain uniform and controllable temperatures in working chamber from 1800 to 2300 degrees Fahr., for efficiently heating billets and ingots for forging, of sizes adaptable to the heating chamber of the furnace when properly handled and operated under the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Filbert v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  2. Gross v. Exeter Machine Works, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  3. Ridgeway Dynamo & Engine Co. v. Pennsylvania Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  4. Electric Reduction Co. v. Colonial Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  5. North Shore Railroad v. Pennsylvania Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Shipley v. Pittsburgh & L. E. R. Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1949
  3. California Fruit Exchange v. HenryDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
  4. Canuso v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  5. Mannella v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

11 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