George Delker Co. v. Hess Spring & Axle Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Kentucky. The defendant in error (plaintiff below), hereinafter called the “plaintiff,” was engaged in the business of manufacturing vehicle springs and axles at Carthage, Ohio, and on the 3d day of November, 1899, entered into two contracts with the plaintiff in error (defendant below), hereinafter called the “defendant,” who was engaged in the business of manufacturing vehicles at Henderson, Ky.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Kentucky. The defendant in error (plaintiff below), hereinafter called the “plaintiff,” was engaged in the business of manufacturing vehicle springs and axles at Carthage, Ohio, and on the 3d day of November, 1899, entered into two contracts with the plaintiff in error (defendant below), hereinafter called the “defendant,” who was engaged in the business of manufacturing vehicles at Henderson, Ky. One of these contracts was to furnish 2,500 sets of axles, and the other to furnish 35 tons of springs, during the…
1Opinion of the CourtWanty, District Judge
The defendant claims that the facts found by the judge below do not support the judgment rendered, because, first, the contracts are •so indefinite as to lack mutuality; second, the plaintiff should have given notice of its election under the clause in the contracts giving it the option to consider the specifications sufficient, or that the neglect to specify might be considered a lawful tender of the undelivered goods and a refusal of acceptance; and, third, that the measure of damages should have been the difference between the contract price and the market price.
1. These contracts are…
2Cases cited5 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
3Cited by12 opinions
- Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. HowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Sizer & Co. v. Melton & SonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Yates v. Whyel Coke Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1915
- Atlanta Buggy Co. v. Hess Spring & Axle Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Salmon v. Helena Box Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.