Legal Opinion

Cleveland Builders Supply Co. v. City Investment Co.

Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court

Decided May 28, 1913PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBabcock, J.

The City Investment Company, before advertising for bids for the construction of their building known as the Swetland, solicited offers by supply men of such- material as they wished *384to have used in the construction of their building. They solicited of the plaintiff prices for Darlington brick, in large quantities, but to be sold and charged to the contractor when one was engaged. The Cleveland Builders Supply Company made a written proposition, as requested, for the supply of brick; but since they were to sell to an unknown and unengaged contractor to whom the bills for the brick were to be…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Peabody v. Chicago Gas Trust Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Holmes v. . WillardNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  3. Humboldt Min. Co. v. American Manufacturing, Mining & Milling Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1894
  4. Central Lumber Co. v. KelterIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Low v. Cal. Pac. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1877

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. E. Edelmann & Co. v. AmosDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API