Legal Opinion

Jones v. Union Guano Co.

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 18, 1924No. 73PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Butler

Plaintiff in error brought this action in the Superior Court of Rockingham County to recover damages alleged to have resulted to his tobacco crop from the use of fertilizer manufactured and sold by defendant in error. A state law (§ 7, c. 143, Laws of 1917) provides that no such action shall be brought until after chemical analysis showing the ingredients of the fertilizer. The plaintiff in error failed to meet this requirement, and, notwithstanding evidence tending to show inferior quality of and deleterious ingredients in the fertilizer and injury to the crop resulting from its use, the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. Truax v. CorriganSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. Adams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  5. Mobile, Jackson & Kansas City Railroad v. TurnipseedSupreme Court of the United States · 1910

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Bazley v. TortorichSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1981
  2. Everett v. GoldmanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1978
  3. Attorney General v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  4. Nellie Woods, as Personal Representative of the Estate of John N. Woods v. Holy Cross HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
  5. Liberty Warehouse Co. v. Burley Tobacco Growers' Co-Operative Marketing Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928

19 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