Legal Opinion
American Tin-Plate Co. v. Trotter
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
Decided December 26, 1900PublishedCited by 2 opinions
At Law. Action for breach of contract. On motion by defendants for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
1Opinion of the Court
J. B. McPHEBSON, District Judge.
The facts in this case, which are not in dispute, are as follows: In January, 1897, the parties to the suit entered into a contract that contained, inter alia, these provisions :
“The American Tin-Plate Co., of Elwood, Indiana, agrees to sell, and Nathan Trotter & Co., of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, agrees to buy:
“Description of Goods: ‘Kanner’ brand tin plates.
“Quantity: 5,000 boxes, surface 14x20, 112 sheets. * * *
“Sizes: Buyers to have privilege of specifying any of the following sizes [naming eighteen sizes from 10x14 to 20x28]. t
“Place of Delivery: Car lots…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hapgood v. ShawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Nelson v. . Plimpton Fire-Proof E. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Smith v. LoomisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1828
- Posey v. ScalesIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- DeLoach & Brother v. Smith & AndersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
3Cited by2 opinions
- Scruggs & Echols v. RiddleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
- Bisbee Linseed Co. v. Paragon Paint & Varnish Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933