Wolff v. Wells, Fargo & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the circuit judge, referred to in the opinion, are as follows: “(1) On or about the 24th day of September, 1897, the defendant, at the city and county of San Francisco, state of California, contracted to sell to the plaintiff as much Alsen’s German Portland Cement as the plaintiff should require for use in the construction of a building…
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the circuit judge, referred to in the opinion, are as follows: “(1) On or about the 24th day of September, 1897, the defendant, at the city and county of San Francisco, state of California, contracted to sell to the plaintiff as much Alsen’s German Portland Cement as the plaintiff should require for use in the construction of a building which the plaintiff was at that time about to erect in said city and county of San Francisco, at the rate of $2.56 per…
1Opinion of the Court
HAWLEY, District Judge.
This is an action to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract for the delivery of 5,000 barrels of cement, more or less. The contract is embodied in a letter from the plaintiff in error which reads as follows:
“Alsen’s Portland Cement Warehouse, Manufacturers of Portland Cement.
William Wolff & Co., California Agent, 329 Market Street, San Francisco.
“San Francisco, California, September 24, -1897.
“Colonel Geo. E. Gray, 1st Vice President Wells, Fargo & Co., City — Dear Sir: Referring to the conversation the writer, Mr. Baker, had with you this afternoon, we take…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Brawley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Lehnen v. DicksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Walker v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1894
- Budge v. United Smelting & Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1900
3Cited by13 opinions
- Jensma v. Sun Life Assur. Co. of CanadaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- Mathieson Alkali Works v. Virginia Banner Coal Corp.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1927
- Schneider v. City of Ann ArborMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Foreman's Systems, Inc. v. Milk Dealers' Crate Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1923
- Harding v. TaubelCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1924
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.