Legal Opinion

Utter v. Chapman

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1869PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth District, San Joaquin County. The case is stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtRhodes, J.

It is apparent from the contract, though it is not drawn according to the most approved forms, that both parties are bound—the defendant to furnish five hundred tons of wheat, and pay $2 per ton for its transportation; and the plaintiffs to transport the wheat from Paradise City to Stockton. It is also clear from the evidence that the defendant failed to furnish the wheat. Such failure amounted to a breach of the contract, for which the defendant is responsible in damages, and the important question in the case relates to the measure of damages.

The plaintiffs insist on the rule that the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Clark v. MarsigliaCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
  2. Shannon v. ComstockNew York Supreme Court · 1839
  3. Wilson v. MartinCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
  4. Hale v. TroutCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
  5. Ashburner v. . BalchenNew York Court of Appeals · 1852

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Clayworth v. Pfizer, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Wilson v. MadisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Hill v. McKayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Gazette Printing Co. v. MorssIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Erler v. Five Points Motors, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1967

9 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