Standard Oil Co. v. Scofield
New York Supreme Court
Trial of issues raised by demurrer to complaint. The Standard Oil Company, an Ohio corporation, brought this action against William C. Scofield and others, composing the firm of Scofield, Shurmer & Teagle, for an accounting, payment, &c., under a contract made between the parties as to the business of refining and dealing in crude petroleum.
Read the full summary
Trial of issues raised by demurrer to complaint. The Standard Oil Company, an Ohio corporation, brought this action against William C. Scofield and others, composing the firm of Scofield, Shurmer & Teagle, for an accounting, payment, &c., under a contract made between the parties as to the business of refining and dealing in crude petroleum. The complaint alleged the incorporation of the plaintiff under certain specified statutes of Ohio, the partnership of defendants, the making of the contract annexed as part of the complaint ;* its suspension by notice from the plaintiff as provided…
1Opinion of the CourtBartlett, J.
Three objections are urged upon this demurrer to the complaint as not stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action: First, that the contract sued upon is ultra vires as to the plaintiff. Secondly, that the contract is void, as being in restraint of trade, and therefore against public policy. And, finally, that the complaint does not allege due performance by the plaintiff of all the conditions of the contract on its part.
I will consider these objections in the order in which I have stated them.
1. Is the contract in suit ultra vires ?
The complaint refers to the particular acts of…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Canada Southern Railway Co. v. GebhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Williams v. McMillanOhio Supreme Court · 1849
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad v. Denver & New Orleans RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Mitchell v. . ReedNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Lorillard v. . ClydeNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Willey v. Crocker-Woolworth National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. BrandNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Green v. GrantMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- People v. North River Sugar Refining Co.New York Supreme Court · 1889