Legal Opinion

COLLETT v. Goodrich

Utah Supreme Court

Decided May 16, 1951No. 7511PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOLFE, Chief Justice.

Action upon an account for merchandise sold and delivered to appellant, Merrill Goodrich, by respondents’ assignor, Uinta Oil Refining Company, hereinafter called the Refining Co. Appellant admitted that he owed the Refining Co. some $19,000 for petroleum products sold to him, but counter-claimed for breach of an alleged contract for the exclusive right to sell the Refining Company’s products in the Uintah Basin. From the judgment and order dismissing his counter-claim, appellant appeals.

For several years prior to 1945, appellant distributed gasoline and petroleum…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Tracy Loan & Trust Co. v. Openshaw Inv. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Block v. ShermanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1941
  3. Hargreaves v. BurtonUtah Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Berow v. ShieldsUtah Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Hawaiian Equipment Co., Limited v. Eimco CorporationUtah Supreme Court · 1949

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. English v. Standard Optical Co.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1991
  2. Birdzell v. Utah Oil Refining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1952
  3. MacHan Hampshire Properties, Inc. v. Western Real Estate & Development Co.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1989
  4. MacHan Hampshire Properties, Inc. v. Western Real Estate & Development Co.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API