Legal Opinion
Rosenbaum Hardware Co. v. Paxton Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Decided January 16, 1919PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Error to a judgment of the Corporation Court of city of Newport News, in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant assigns error.
1Opinion of the CourtPrentis, J.
This controversy arises out of a contract which is evidenced by two letters, one dated October 22, 1915, from Newport News, Va., addressed by the Rosenbaum Hardware Company (hereafter called the defendant) to the Paxton Lumber Company (hereafter called the plaintiff), at Bristol, Tennessee, reading thus:
“Your telegram of this date received. You will please enter our order for one carload of 4x6 white oak for bending purposes to be delivered within 30 days from this date. Specifications as follows:
“Quality: To be selected white oak, straight grained and free from knots, heart centers, shake,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Sturm v. BokerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Summers v. Hibbard, Spencer, Bartlett & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Miller & Co. v. Moore, Sims & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1889
- R. J. Menz Lumber Co. v. E. J. McNeeley & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
- Gould v. SteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bardach Iron & Steel Co. v. TenenbaumSupreme Court of Virginia · 1923
- Birdsong & Co. v. American Peanut Corp.Court of Appeals of Virginia · 1928
- Hosiery Mills v. G. C. Hall & SonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Baker v. J. C. Watson Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1943
- Sitterley v. Gray Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.