Legal Opinion

Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Continental Can Co.

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1921No. 13824PublishedCited by 115 opinions

Writ or Error to the Appellate Court for the First District; — heard in that court on appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles A. Williams, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thompson

Plaintiff in error, the Armstrong Paint and Varnish Works, is a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of paint and varnish, and defendant in error, the Continental Can Company, is a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of tin cans and packages. March 11, 1916, the parties entered into a written contract whereby the can company agreed to sell, and the paint company agreed to purchase, “a minimum of $2000 worth of tin packages or more, as required by them, (as priced and described below,) which buyers will need for actual use in their business between the date hereof and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hayes v. O'BrienIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Minnesota Lumber Co. v. Whitebreast Coal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Whalen v. StephensIllinois Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Cooper v. Lansing Wheel Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Logan v. Mutual Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1920

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by115 opinions

  1. Nelson v. Union Wire Rope Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Air Safety, Inc. v. Teachers Realty Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Pace Corporation v. JacksonTexas Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Thomas P. Davis and Cathy M. Davis v. G.N. Mortgage Corporation and Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
  5. Martin v. Federal Life Insurance Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1982

110 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API