Legal Opinion
American MacHine & Metals, Inc. v. De Bothezat Impeller Co., Inc
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided June 5, 1950No. 21487_1PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CHASE, Circuit Judge.
The difficulties which may be encountered in construing a contract which has been carefully prepared by skillful counsel are well illustrated by this appeal. After a lengthy period of negotiations the parties to this suit executed a written contract on April 3, 1934 in New York City which was undoubtedly intended to be a complete embodiment of the agreement they had reached, but which has furnished the basis for protracted litigation.
The appellant, De Bothezat Impeller Company, Inc., is a Delaware corporation which then was, and for some years previously had been,…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Old Dearborn Distributing Co. v. Seagram-Distillers Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Diamond Match Co. v. . RoeberNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Randall v. Peerless Motor Car Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Dougherty v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Van Valkenburgh, Nooger & Neville, Inc. v. Hayden Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Farmland Irrigation Co. v. DopplmaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Rieser v. Baltimore Ohio Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Western Geophysical Company of America, Inc. v. Bolt Associates, Inc., Bolt Associates, Inc., Third-Party v. Litton Industries, Inc., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1979
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.