Legal Opinion

W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Langford

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided October 27, 1933PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

In the trial of an action at law the judge gave the following charge to the jury, which was excepted to by plaintiff in error, the plaintiff below, by incorporating same as ground of a motion for a new trial:

“ ‘But, if after entering into the contract you find from the evidence that the plaintiffs in this' case, by caprice or inducement, inveigled Langford to adopt a system which the contract didn’t call for, and he did adopt at their request, and he sold goods on credit, he would be entitled to the benefit of that credit if he carried out the instructions they gave him. Neither would Leonard…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Sottile v. Gaines Construction CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
  2. Sunrise Lakes Condominium Apartments, Phase III, Inc. 3 v. HechtmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  3. The W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. LangfordSupreme Court of Florida · 1937
  4. Enstrom v. DunningSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
  5. Sapp v. McConnon & Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API