AMERICAN SEATING CO.
v.
ZELL
AMERICAN SEATING CO.
ZELL
322 U.S. 709
Supreme Court of the United States (1944)
Caution
Cited by 20 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
In this case two members of the Court think that the judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals should be affirmed. Seven are of opinion that the judgment should be reversed and the judgment of the District Court affirmed — four because proof of the contract alleged in respondent’s affidavits on the motion for summary judgment is precluded by the applicable state parol evidence rule, and three because the contract is contrary to public policy and void, see Tool Company v. Norris, 2 Wall. 45, 54; Hazelton v. Sheckells, 202 U. S. 71, 79; Executive Order No. 9001, Tit. II, par. 5, 6 Fed. Reg. 6788; War Department Procurement Regulations, 10 Code Fed. Reg. (Cum. Supp.) § 81.1181. The judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals is reversed. Mr. William Dwight Whitney, with whom Mr. Albert B. Connelly was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. J. Edward Lumbard, Jr., with whom Messrs. Ralstone R. Irvine and Theodore S. Hope, Jr. were on the brief, for respondent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hope v. Hearst Consol. Publ'ns, Inc., 294 F.2d 681 (2d Cir. 1961)…ie sense, and should apply irrespective of what a federal equity court might have done, Such would be a State parol evidence rule. As this court said in Zell v. American Seating Co., 2 Cir., 1943, 138 F. 2d 641, 643, reversed on other grounds, 1944, 322 U.S. 709, 64 S.Ct. 1053, 88 L.Ed. 1552: “Were the parol evidence rule a rule of evidence, we could decide this question without reference to state court decisions. But the federal courts have held, in line with what has become the customary doctrine in most…
-
Mitchell v. Flintkote Co., 185 F.2d 1008 (2d Cir. 1951)…868; Trist v. Child, 21 Wall. 441, 22 L.Ed. 623; Meguire v. Corwine, 101 U.S. 108, 25 L.Ed. 899; Oscanyan v. Arms Co., 103 U.S. 261, 26 L.Ed. 539; Hazelton v. Sheckells, 202 U.S. 71, 26 S.Ct. 567, 50 L.Ed. 939. See also American Seating Co. v. Zell, 322 U.S. 709, 64 S.Ct. 1053, 88 L.Ed. 1057, reversing per curiam, 2 Cir., 138 F. 2d 641. . Williston, Contracts, rev. ed., § 1729A; see also Comment in 17 U.Chi.L.R.ev. 491. . First promulgated December 27, 1941, the Order continued in effect as amended by Exe…
-
Garza v. Marine Transp. Lines, Inc., 861 F.2d 23 (2d Cir. 1988)…their words. "No contract should ever be interpreted and enforced with a meaning that neither party gave it." 3 A. Corbin, supra, § 572B, at 198 (Supp.1971). . Zell v. American Seating Co., 138 F. 2d 641, 643 (2d Cir.1943), rev'd on other grounds, 322 U.S. 709, 64 S.Ct. 1053, 88 L.Ed. 1552 (1944); Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Whitelawn Dairies, Inc., 284 F.Supp. 987 (S.D.N.Y.1968); 3 A. Corbin, Contracts, §§ 572B-573 (1960 and Supp.1971). . The sole negligence provision is another "red letter” clause which reliev…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Tool Co. v. Norris, 2 Wall. 45 (U.S. 1864)
- Hazelton v. Sheckells, 202 U.S. 71 (U.S. 1906)