Legal Opinion
DeCicco v. Uniroyal, Inc.
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided October 24, 1968No. Civ. Nos. 67-232, 67-355, 67-365PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND FINDINGS
KILKENNY, District Judge.
In this proceeding on the issues segregated for separate trial, DeCicco asserts *1192that Uniroyal breached its contract by selling him defective tires. DeCicco claims that he was unable to collect the purchase price or was required to make adjustments with his customers for the defective tires, and that many customers discontinued doing business with him, to his damage in the amount of $200,000.00.
Uniroyal has denied DeCicco’s contentions. In addition, Uniroyal asserts a counterclaim against DeCicco in the amount of $42,578.17, for goods sold on open…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Horton v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Greenbaum v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
- Western Feed Co. v. HeidloffOregon Supreme Court · 1962
- Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Emmett HortonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1960
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In the Matter of Solari Furs, a Partnership, Theodore Rosenberg and Robert Rosenberg, Bankrupts-Appellants v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1971