Legal Opinion

Gibson & Price Co. v. Rouse & Hills Co.

Cuyahoga Circuit Court

Decided January 26, 1903Published

Appeal.

1Opinion of the CourtCaldwell, J.

The defendant, the Rouse & Hills Co., was in business in the city of Cleveland, and B. L. Rouse was the president of the company and representing- the company in most of the transactions involved in this action.

B. L. Rouse, while the active man in the Rouse & Hills Co. during the course of the events narrated in the evidence in this case, also had a business of his own, which he conducted as B. L. Rouse & Co. His business was largely the manufacturing of goods in the same line as the goods that the Rouse & Hills Co. handled and his goods were sold directly to the Rouse & Hills Co. The Rouse &…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lehman, Durr & Co. v. Van Winkle & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1890
  2. In re ShirleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1901
  3. State Savings Bank v. BuckSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  4. Standard Paper Co. v. GuentherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Willamette Casket Co. v. Cross Undertaking Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1895

4 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