Legal Opinion

Metropolitan Coal Co. v. Billings

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 22, 1909PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.

These are actions of contract and were tried and have been argued together. That by the coal company is to recover a balance alleged to be due for coal sold and delivered to the defendant. That by Billings is to recover damages for the alleged breach by the coal company of a written contract between him and it for the sale and delivery of coal by it to him. There was a verdict for the plaintiff in each case, though that for Billings was less than he claimed, and each case is here on exceptions by Billings to the admission of evidence, to the refusal of the presiding judge * to give certain…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Garfield & Proctor Coal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal & Coke Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  2. Oakman v. BoyceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Takahashi v. Pepper Tank & Contracting Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Consolidation Coal Co. v. Peninsular Portland Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921
  3. Acme Mfg. Co. v. Arminius Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1919
  4. New England Concrete Construction Co. v. Shepard & Morse Lumber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
  5. General Commercial Co. v. Butterworth-Judson Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921

7 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