Standard Distilling & Distributing Co. v. Block & Sons
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
1DissentHoffhbtmer, J.
I am compelled to dissent. My reasons for so doing, stated as briefly as possible, are as follows:
There are two views to be taken of the case, either one of which, in my judgment, bars recovery. The pleaded contract, on its face, appears to be one in general restraint of trade. The promise upon which B. & Sons seek recovery is based on a consideration which, to say the least, is in part illegal. Its breach, therefore, can not be made the predicate of an action at law. The broader aspect of the case, however, carries us beyond what may appear to be the scope of the pleadings. Strictly…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Trist v. ChildSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Coppell v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Bishop v. PalmerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Douthart v. CongdonIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.