Monarch Cycle Mfg. Co. v. Royer Wheel Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. On the 10th day of October, 1895, the Monarch Cycle.Manufacturing Company , entered into a contract with the Royer Cycle Company, at Cincinnati, Ohio, by a certain memorandum of agreement, as follows: “That in consideration of the prices, terms, and conditions hereinafter named on bicycles manufactured by said Monarch Cycle Manufacturing Company, party of the second part agrees to, and does…
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. On the 10th day of October, 1895, the Monarch Cycle.Manufacturing Company , entered into a contract with the Royer Cycle Company, at Cincinnati, Ohio, by a certain memorandum of agreement, as follows: “That in consideration of the prices, terms, and conditions hereinafter named on bicycles manufactured by said Monarch Cycle Manufacturing Company, party of the second part agrees to, and does hereby, purchase of the said party of the first part, for delivery as hereinafter specified, 1,500 bicycles, at the…
1Opinion of the Court
DAY, Circuit Judge,
after stating the foregoing facts, delivered the opinion of tlie court..
As to the verdict on the first cause of action, for wheels sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant, there is no assignment of error, and the verdict and judgment in that respect tire not complained of.
Under the second cause of action set up irnthe petition, the plaintiff, having failed to recover, alleges that certain instructions of the court in respect thereto were erroneous. It is alleged that the court erred in charging the jury as to the effect of failure of the defendant to specify the wheels…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Norrington v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Cherry Valley Iron Works v. Florence Iron River Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1894
3Cited by16 opinions
- Loudenback Fertilizer Co. v. Tennessee Phosphate Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1903
- Quarton v. American Law Book Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Armour & Co. v. KollmeyerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
- Michigan Yacht & Power Co. v. BuschCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1906
- Chicago Great Western Ry. Co. v. RoddyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.