Howard v. Stillwell & Bierce Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. This was an action at law by the Stillwell and Bierce Manufacturing Company, an Ohio corporation, having its principal place of business at Dayton in that State, against W. C. Howard, S. T. Stratton and J. Rauch, citizens of Texas, to recover a balance due on a contract' in writing entered into between the parties hereto,- March 23, 1885, for the reconstruction by the company of a flour-mill…
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. This was an action at law by the Stillwell and Bierce Manufacturing Company, an Ohio corporation, having its principal place of business at Dayton in that State, against W. C. Howard, S. T. Stratton and J. Rauch, citizens of Texas, to recover a balance due on a contract' in writing entered into between the parties hereto,- March 23, 1885, for the reconstruction by the company of a flour-mill owned by the defendants in Dallas, Texas. The contract provided, among other things, that the party of the first part…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice Lamar,
after stating the.case, delivered the opinion of the court.
The errors assigned are as follows: “ (1) There was error in sustaining the exception to that part of defendants’ plea which sought the recovery of profits, and in rejecting defendants’ offer of evidence in support of the plea. (2) 'The court erred in overruling the defendants’ motion to suppress the deposition of Odell.”
We will consider these assignments in the reverse order in which they are stated. The points made against the deposition of Odell by counsel for plaintiffs in error are, that it was not taken under…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- United States v. BehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Wakeman v. Wheeler & Wilson Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Griffin v. . ColverNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Philadelphia, Wilmington & Baltimore Railroad v. HowardSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- The Amiable NancySupreme Court of the United States · 1818
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by206 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- John Hetherington & Sons, Ltd. v. William Firth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Globe Refining Co. v. Landa Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1903
- The CaledoniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Primrose v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
201 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.