Furness, Withy Co. v. Randall
FURNESS, WITHY & COMPANY, Ltd., a Corporation, vs. JOHN T. FAHEY, Trading as John T. Fahey & Company
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Stockbridge, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
The questions of law presented by this appeal are identical with those considered in the. case of Furness, Withy & Co. v. Blanchard Randall et al., ante p. 101. The only points of difference are, that three contracts, dated, respectively, September 21st, 23rd and October 4th, 1911, are here involved instead of one. The notice or “nomination” sent on December 2nd, designating the Amana as the vessel on which the shipments were -to be carried, bore upon its face the approval of Fahey & Co. The pleadings, evidence and rulings were simply a repetition of those in the case of Gill & Fisher, and for the reasons there given the judgment appealed from will be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded for a neiu trial, appellees to pay costs.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.