Legal Opinion

Ball v. Stokely Foods, Inc.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 31, 1950No. 31133PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.

These were five separate actions, consolidated for purposes of trial, brought by pea growers in Skagit county, against Stokely Foods, Inc. Plaintiffs sought to recover damages allegedly sustained as a result of defendant’s delay in harvesting their peas during 1947. From verdicts and judgments in favor of plaintiffs, defendant has appealed.

The suits are predicated upon written contracts, which are substantially identical in terms. They provide that the seller, or grower, should cultivate, for the benefit of the buyer, Stokely, specified quantities of peas. They read further:

“It is understood…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Clark v. State Street Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  2. Klueter v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Cohn v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Hollingsworth v. Robe Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Nunner v. EricksonOregon Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. State v. RoggenkampWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. RoggenkampWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
  4. State v. JacksonWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. LilybladWashington Supreme Court · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API