Wiggin v. Consolidated Adjustable Shoe Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract. Trial in the Superior Court, before Hopkins, J., who ruled that the action could not be maintained, and directed a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
This is an action for the breach by the defendant of a written contract between it and the plaintiff. At the date of the contract the defendant was the owner of a patented invention relating to boots and shoes, and was the sole manufacturer of boots and shoes containing the invention, and was seeking to introduce them into new territory. For that purpose it made the contract with the plaintiff. We infer that it made similar contracts with other parties for a like purpose. Under the contract with the plaintiff, it appointed him “ its sole agent for the sale of shoes manufactured by it . . . in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hobbie v. JennisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
3Cited by5 opinions
- Buckley & Scott Utilities, Inc. v. Petroleum Heat & Power Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Garfield v. Peerless Motor Car Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- Edison Phonograph Co. v. PikeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1902
- Illsley v. Peerless Motor Car Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1913
- Keystone Tankship Corp. v. Willamette Iron & Steel Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 1963