Legal Opinion

Crittenden v. Cobb

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Pennsylvania

Decided September 2, 1907No. 55, May Term, 1906PublishedCited by 5 opinions

At Law. On rule for new trial.

1Opinion of the Court

ARCHBALD, District Judge.

By the agreement in suit, the plaintiff in terms contracted to sell, and the defendants to buy, the stock and bonds which he owned of the New York & Pennsylvania Railroad. The stock is specifically designated in the writing, but the bonds are not, it being impossible to do so, as it is stated, for the reason that some of them are “undivided,” it being the declared intention, however, that the plaintiff should sell and the defendants should buy all that the plaintiff owned, whether divided or undivided, being restricted only to those which he then owned, the plaintiff…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lowrey v. HawaiiSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Hamilton v. Hamilton's ExecutorsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851
  3. Welch v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
  4. Kutz v. DreibelbisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jones v. Sinclair Crude Oil Purchasing Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
  2. Lamb v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  3. Boyle v. SmithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1949
  4. Larsen v. BuysIdaho Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Cobb v. CrittendenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1908

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

Powered by the Exa API