Legal Opinion

Haverfield Co. v. Evatt

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1944No. 29773PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

The controversy in this case arises from a disagreement as to the construction and effect of the contract between the parties, particularly the following provisions:

“* * * iessor sball, when charges have been approved, immediately credit the amounts thereof to the account of the lessee, but until said charges have been remitted for by lessor, said charge accounts shall be and remain the property of the lessee. After remittance on the same, the lessor shall assume ownership-of said accounts and all risk of collection. The lessor shall have the sole right to determine the manner'of ex-' tending…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ransom & Randolph Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  2. In re Steele-Smith Dry Goods Co.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 1924
  3. In re KlineDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1934
  4. Procter & Gamble Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1943

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. National Cash Register Co. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1945
  2. National Distillers Products Corp. v. GlanderOhio Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Moore v. FreemanNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Rosen v. GarstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  5. Baldwin Co. v. GlanderOhio Supreme Court · 1947

5 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