Legal Opinion

Sinclair Coal Co. v. Pittsburgh & Ashland Coal & Dock Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 28, 1929No. 27,451PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

Plaintiff is a wholesale coal merchant at Kansas City. Defendant is a coal jobber in Minneapolis. Plaintiff sued to recover $2,720.48, balance on an account, which defendant conceded, but alleged a counterclaim of $4,533.34. The court sustained the coun terclaim, and the difference, interest and expenses went into. the judgment.

Plaintiff furnished coal to defendant and claims the transaction was a sale. Defendant claims to have been plaintiff’s agent handling the coal on commission. Some of the coal shipped was subjected to demurrage which defendant paid in the aggregate sum of $4,533.34. If…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sutton v. BakerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  2. Veltum v. KoehlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
  3. Martin v. FeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Louis DeGidio Oil & Gas Burner Sales & Service, Inc. v. Ace Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  2. Lyman Lumber Coal Co. v. Travelers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  3. Hollandale Marketing Ass'n v. GoematSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  4. State v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API