Legal Opinion
Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided May 13, 1927No. 25,901PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.
Plaintiff appealed from an order sustaining separate demurrers of the defendants on the ground that the complaint does not state a cause of action.
The complaint alleges: A subsisting agency contract between plaintiff and defendant corporation which, in the event of any question arising threatening to interfere with their mutually satisfactory business relationship, could be terminated only by notice of 60 or 10 days depending on whether plaintiff was an exclusive Chevrolet dealer. The business relations between plaintiff and defendant corporation were mutually satisfactory. The contract…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Angle v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Bitterman v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Lamb v. S. Cheney & SonNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Berry v. DonovanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Wild v. RarigSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- Imperial Ice Co. v. RossierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Rico v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- Wise v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1963
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.