Legal Opinion

American Glue Co. v. Rayburn

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 6, 1908No. Docket No. 17PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Alpena; Emerick, J. Assumpsit by the American Glue Company against Robert H. Rayburn and William H. Campbell, copartners as the Michigan Veneer Company, for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. The plaintiff corporation is a manufacturer of glue. The defendants, copartners, are manufacturers of veneered panels used in the manufacture of furniture. They use a large amount of glue in fastening the veneers together.

Read the full summary

Error to Alpena; Emerick, J. Assumpsit by the American Glue Company against Robert H. Rayburn and William H. Campbell, copartners as the Michigan Veneer Company, for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. The plaintiff corporation is a manufacturer of glue. The defendants, copartners, are manufacturers of veneered panels used in the manufacture of furniture. They use a large amount of glue in fastening the veneers together. Plaintiff had sold the defendants glue for some time prior to the transaction here involved. Plaintiff, desirous of…

1Opinion of the Court

Grant, O. J.

(after stating the facts). 1. The court-submitted the case to the jury upon the theory that the contract called for glue of the same quality as that which had been furnished during the testing period. We think the record discloses that the case was tried by both parties upon that theory. It is, however, now insisted by the plaintiff that the contract provides for two qualities, and that if the plaintiff furnished glue of either quality it had complied with the contract. Counsel base this claim upon that provision of the contract reading:

“Quality in every way to be up to standard,…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Michigan Sugar Co. v. Jebavy-Sorenson Orchard Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. O. C. Barber Mining & Fertilizing Co. v. Brown Hoisting Machinery Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
  3. Robb v. BoomsMichigan Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Cheboygan Paper Co. v. EichbergMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  5. St. Anthony & Dakota Elevator Co. v. Princeton Roller Mill Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API