Bullock v. Finley
United States Circuit Court
The plaintiffs, Bullock & Co., were dealers in produce in the city of New York, and, among other things, were selling brewers’ rice; and the defendant was the owner of a large brewery establishment in the city of Toledo, Ohio, and was using, to some extent, broken rice in the manufacture of beer and ale.
Read the full summary
The plaintiffs, Bullock & Co., were dealers in produce in the city of New York, and, among other things, were selling brewers’ rice; and the defendant was the owner of a large brewery establishment in the city of Toledo, Ohio, and was using, to some extent, broken rice in the manufacture of beer and ale. The plaintiffs claim that the defendant, in December, 1882, purchased from their agent ten car-loads of rice, at the price of three and a half cents per pound, to be delivered to the defendant at Toledo, Ohio, as wanted by the defendant, and all to be delivered before October, 1883. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Welker, J.,
(orally, charging jury.) The first question to settle by you is, was there a contract made to purchase 10 car-loads of rice, as claimed by the plaintiffs? If you find that such a contract was made, then you will ascertain what quantity of rice was to constitute a car-load, in contemplation of the contract. Usually, men who make contracts to buy and sell agree on what they are buying and selling. Where the contract provides that it shall be “car-loads,” some rule must be adopted by which you will determine what the parties meant and regarded as a “car-load.” Contracts must be…
2Cited by5 opinions
- R. J. Menz Lumber Co. v. E. J. McNeeley & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
- Carstens v. HouseWashington Supreme Court · 1917
- Coast Fir Lumber Co. v. ParkerOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- Snoderly v. BowerIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
- Thompson v. Strong, Bagley & BagleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1916