![]() ![]() Peterson Co., 6 Cir., 58 F.2d 11 Ken-Rad Corp. Ass'n, 6 Cir., 103 F.2d 565 Remington-Rand Business Service, Inc., v. National Metal Abrasive Co., 6 Cir., 101 F.2d 489 Crossland v. ![]() As was said by Professor Corbin in, "Cardozo on the Law of Contracts," 52 Harvard Law Review 446, "The meaning that will determine legal effect is that which is arrived at by objective standards one is bound, not by what he subjectively intends, but by what he leads others reasonably to think that he intends." This line of authorities has been consistently followed in this court. It has now long been held by courts of highest repute, that the lack of specific obligation by one of the parties to a contract will not invalidate it where the whole contract may be instinct with obligation even though imperfectly expressed. Iowa Fruit Produce Co., 8 Cir., 112 F.2d 101. Uncertainty as to the number of machines to be ordered by the solicitor was of the very nature of the contract and capable of ascertainment after performance. There was no lack of mutuality in the arrangement between the parties. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |