Conner v. Mount Vernon Co.
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from tbe Superior Court of Baltimore city: The appellants, as plaintiffs below, brought an action of assumpsit based upon the following contract: “Baltimore, Sep. 5th, 1860. “This Article of Agreement, entered into this day between G. M. Conner, C. C. Gatch, of the city of Baltimore, Md., of the first part, and the Mount Yernon Cotton Manufacturing Company, of the same place, of the second part, witnesseth : that the parties of the first part, (viz: Conner & Gatch,)…
Read the full summary
Appeal from tbe Superior Court of Baltimore city: The appellants, as plaintiffs below, brought an action of assumpsit based upon the following contract: “Baltimore, Sep. 5th, 1860. “This Article of Agreement, entered into this day between G. M. Conner, C. C. Gatch, of the city of Baltimore, Md., of the first part, and the Mount Yernon Cotton Manufacturing Company, of the same place, of the second part, witnesseth : that the parties of the first part, (viz: Conner & Gatch,) agree to construct and place in good running order two of the said Conner’s Centripital Momentum "Water-wheels, in the…
1Opinion of the Court
(Goldsborough, J.,
delivered the opinion of this Court:
This suit was brought on a contract to construct two Centripetal Momentum Water-wheels and properly connect them with the machinery of a Cotton Mill. These wheels were to take the place of an over-shot wheel then used in driving the mill, and in the language of the contract, wore “guaranteed to work from twenty to one hundred and ten horse-power with a full head of water, and to effect a saving of twenty per cent, or one-fifth of the water of the over-shot that was in.” Another clause of the contract shows that the contracting parties…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Myers v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1921
- Jones v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1892