Legal Opinion
McCray Refrigerator & Cold Storage Co. v. Woods & Zent
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided March 20, 1894PublishedCited by 34 opinions
Error to St. Joseph. (Loveridge, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff “brings error. The facts are stated in the opinions.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
Plaintiff’s action is brought to recover the contract price of a patented apparatus for a refrigerator furnished to the defendants upon the following contract:
*270“This contract, made this 6th day of January, 1891, by and between McCray Refrigerator and Cold Storage Co., of Kendallville, Noble county, Indiana, of the first part, and Woods & Zent, of Sturgis, county of St. Joseph, State of Michigan, of the second part:
“Witnesseth, That, whereas, the party of the second part is desirous of adopting the McCray patent system of refrigeration in their 20x40 refrigerator: Now we, McCray Refrigerator…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Van Ostrand v. ReedNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Phelps v. WhitakerMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
- Nichols, Shepard & Co. v. CrandallMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Johnson v. CranageMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Peltier v. CollinsNew York Supreme Court · 1830
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- UAW-GM Human Resource Center v. KSL Recreation Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1998
- Davis Calyx Drill Co. v. MalloryCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Salzman v. MaldaverMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
- Ehrsam v. BrownSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
- Little v. G. E. Van Syckle & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.