Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. Standard Lumber Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Action by the Standard Lumber Company against the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Action by the Standard Lumber Company against the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. This is an action in assumpsit, brought by the Standard Dumber Company, a corporation of the state of Kentucky, against the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, a corporation of the state of West Virginia, to recover $25,000 damages for a breach of contract set out in the declaration, and hereinafter printed in full. The declaration claims the right to…
1Opinion of the CourtPritchard, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as ábove). The first and second assignments of error are as follows:
•‘First. The contract is shown to be incomplete upon its face, and there were no allegations in the declaration that the signatures of the Ohio & Big Sandy Railroad Company were waived by either of the parties, or that it was agreed upon and acquiesced in by the defendant without ever having been signed by the Ohio & Big Sandy Railroad Company; because, if the said contract had been ratified by the parties thereto, the declaration should have so stated, and suit should have been brought' against both…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. MuggSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Wight v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Southern Railway Co. v. TiftSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Chicago & A. Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1907
- United States v. Chicago & A. Ry. Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1906
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. HirschCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
- Southern Pacific Co. v. Frye & Bruhn, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1914
- Stillwell v. McPhersonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
- Alabama Cent. R. v. Alabama Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917