Legal Opinion

Montgomery Foundry & Fittings Co. v. Hall Planetary Thread Milling Machine Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 5, 1925No. Appeal, No. 139PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Simpson,

Answering an inquiry from plaintiff, defendant wrote that it would sell to plaintiff two complete heads of its patented No. 3 Planetary Thread Milling Machine, for $1,600 each, stating that “all the working parts of the machine are practically in the heads.” Twelve days later plaintiff wrote, “Ship via our truck to us......two No. 3 Hall Planetary Heads with sprocket, chain and weight, price $1,600 each.” Evidently this resulted in negotiations between the parties as to what was intended to be included in the offer, but the details thereof were excluded by the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Wolverine Glass Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  2. Keck v. Pittsburgh, Harmony, Butler & New Castle Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Rothermel v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. Kirk Johnson Co., Inc. v. LightSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. McKeage MacHinery Co. v. Osborne & Sexton MacHinery Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. Lewis v. FOOD MACHINERY AND CHEMICAL CORP., JOHN BEAN DIV.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1965
  5. American Paper & Pulp Co., Inc. v. Maurice Denenberg, Individually and Trading as Denny Paper & Board Co., (Lansdowne Paper Mill, Inc.)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1956

2 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