Rommel v. Wingate
Cases that cite this one
19 later published cases cite this decision.
- Landesman v. Gumersell (Mo. Ct. App. 1885)
- Beit Bros. v. Irving Tanning Co. (Mass. 1944)
- Smith, Fitzmaurice Co. v. Harris (Me. 1927)
- F. W. Stock & Sons v. Snell (Mass. 1922)
- Rock Glen Salt Co. v. Segal (Mass. 1918)
- Sunshine Cloak & Suit Co. v. Roquette Bros. (N.D. 1915)
- Mercier v. James Murchie's Sons Co. (Me. 1914)
- Clauss Shear Co. v. Alabama Barber Supply Co. (Ala. Ct. App. 1911)
- Ferguson v. West Coast Shingle Co. (Ark. 1910)
- Bamberger Bros. v. Burrows (Iowa 1910)
- Lewis v. Muse (Mo. Ct. App. 1908)
- Denton v. McInnis (Mo. Ct. App. 1900)
- Redlands Orange Growers Ass'n v. Gorman (Mo. Ct. App. 1898)
- Reynolds v. Spencer (New York Supreme Court 1895)
- Lamar Milling & Elevator Co. v. Craddock (Colo. App. 1894)
- Lamar Milling & Elevator Co. v. Craddock (Colo. App. 1894)
- Perry v. Mount Hope Iron Co. (R.I. 1888)
- Cleveland Rolling Mill v. Rhodes (Supreme Court of the United States 1887)
- Rugg v. Davis (Ill. App. Ct. 1885)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The evidence of the contract entered into by the parties to this suit is contained in the letter of the plaintiff of March 6, 1868, and the second telegraphic despatch sent by order of the defendants on March 9,1868. The letter of the defendants of March 5, containing an order which the plaintiff did not comply with, and the first telegraphic despatch, are immaterial. The plaintiff’s letter of March 6 was an offer to ship to the defendants the coal therein described, at the prices and upon the terms named, and was of no effect until accepted by the defendants. The minds of the parties did not meet in any agreement, until the second telegraphic despatch was sent. This despatch, and the letter of March 6, therefore, are the only evidence before us of the contract, upon the proper construction of which the rights of the parties depend: The contract of the defendants was, in substance, that they would purchase a cargo of 375 tons of Scranton and Wilkesbarre coal, at the prices named by the plaintiff, to be shipped on board a vessel ready to be loaded at once. It is obvious that both the quantity of
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.