Worrell v. Kinnear Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of tlie Law and Equity Conrt of the city of Norfolk, in an action of assumpsit, wherein the defendant im error was the plaintiff, and the plaintiffs in error were the defendants.
1Opinion of the CourtWhittle, J.
On June 8, 1903, the defendant in error, by a written contract, obligated itself to manufacture and erect for the plaintiff in error seventy-three galvanized steel shutter doors, to be used in the union warehouses and slip of the Southern Kailway Company and the Atlantic Coast Line Kailway, at that time in process of erection in the city of Norfolk, at the price of $5,553.90.
On the following day the plaintiff in error despatched a telegram to the defendant in error, withdrawing its acceptance of the offer by which the contract in question had been consummated; and immediately awarded the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Devlin v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Todd v. . GambleNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Savage v. BowenSupreme Court of Virginia · 1905
- Burke v. ShaverSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
- D. Morrison & Co. v. LovejoySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1861
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Bunch v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1983
- Perfecting Service Co. v. Product Development & Sales Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Spruill v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1980
- E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of Virginia · 1919
- Georgia Power & Light Co. v. Fruit Growers Express Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.