Stanton v. Hamilton
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Washington; Frank H. Rudkin, Judge. Action by J. E. Hamilton against E. H. Stanton. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Washington; Frank H. Rudkin, Judge. Action by J. E. Hamilton against E. H. Stanton. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Action at law to recover $21,926.67, with interest thereon from May 21, 1917, alleged to be due the plaintiff in a transaction involving the sale to Armour & Co., of Chicago, of 1,096% shares of stock owned by the plaintiff in the E. H. Stanton Company, of Spokane, Wash. The case was tried before a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
MORROW, Circuit Judge.
The issues in this case are the same as in Stanton v. Hample, 272 Fed. 424, just decided, with the exception that in this case the defendant claims that there was a rescission of the original contract of sale on the part of Hamilton, and the delivery of his stock upon a new contract, after he knew all the facts concerning the sale of Stanton’s stock. It appears that Hample’s contract provided that his stock should be deposited in the First National Bank at Butte, Mont., and that Armour & Co. should pay for it there within a stated time. Hamilton's contract was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stanton v. HampleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
3Cited by1 opinion
- Stanton v. HampleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921