Holland-Cook Mfg. Co. v. Consolidated Wagon & Machine Co.
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Third District; Hon. F. C. Loofbourow, Judge. Action by Holland-Cook Manufacturing Company against the Consolidated Wagon and Machine Company. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtFrick, J.
The plaintiff, a corporation, sued the defendant, also- a corporation, to recover damages for breach of contract. It is, among other things, alleged in the complaint that the defendant had refused to receive three carloads of silos which it had ordered or purchased from the-plaintiff. The defendant denied the contract of purchase, and, as an affirmative defense, averred that if a contract was entered into it was oral *45and void under the statute of frauds. A trial to the court, without a jury, resulted in findings and judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant.appeals.
The place of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hinckley v. Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Minnesota Lumber Co. v. Whitebreast Coal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Kingman & Co. v. Western Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1899
- Ault v. DustinTennessee Supreme Court · 1898
- Kimball Bros. v. DeereSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Stewart v. HansenUtah Supreme Court · 1923
- Magna Oil & Refining Co. v. Parkville Oil Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Shore Lumber Co. v. American Lumber & Export Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
- Tanner v. JohnsonUtah Supreme Court · 1917
- Stewart v. HansenUtah Supreme Court · 1923