Wickham & Burton Coal Co. v. Farmers Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Webster District Court. — B. M. Wright, J udge. Counterclaim asserting that damages were due from plaintiff because of a contract made between plaintiff and defendant. A demurrer to the counterclaim ivas overruled. Hence this appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.
I. The counterclaim alleges that, about August 18, 1916, defendant, through an agent, entered into an oral agreement “whereby plaintiff agreed to furnish and to deliver to defendant orders given them” for carload shipments of coal from defendant F. O. B. mines, “to be shipped to defendant at such railroad yard stations as defendant might direct, at the price of $1.50 a ton on all orders up to September 1, 1916, and $1.65 a ton on all orders from then to April 1„ 1917.” It is further alleged that “said coal ordered would be and consist” of what was known as plaintiff’s Paradise 6" lump, 6x3"…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Cold Blast Transp. Co. v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Chicago & Great Eastern Railway Co. v. DaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- National Furnace Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1884
- Crane v. C. Crane & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1901
- Davie v. Lumberman's Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Diversified Foods, Inc. v. First National Bank of BostonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992
- Economy Roofing & Insulating Co. v. ZumarisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1995
- Palmer v. AlbertSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
- Imperial Refining Co. v. Kanotex Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- Van Deren v. Heineke & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1927
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.