Legal Opinion
Plimpton v. Mattakeunk Cabin Colony, Inc.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided June 6, 1934No. 1947PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS, District Judge.
This matter is now before the court on the rule nisi issued June 27, 1933, directing the executors’ testator, Robert E. Farley, to show cause why he should not specifically perform his contract to purchase real estate in custodia legis herein, pay damages accrued to the estate in receivership by reason of his alleged anticipatory breach; or, in the alterna-' tive, why the property should not be ordered resold at his risk, he to respond to any loss resulting from resale and from prior accrued damage. The rule further directed him to show cause why, if he proved recusant,…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- Blackmer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Ballard v. HunterSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Pewabic Mining Co. v. MasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Isaak v. County of Yavapai (In Re Prescott College)District Court, D. Arizona · 1981
- Read v. ElliottCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1938
- Kilsheimer v. Rose & MoskowitzCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
- Steward v. MoskowitzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- Munoz Bermudez v. Industrial Siderurgica, Inc.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.