Paramount Textile Machinery Co. v. Walter Snyder Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding it unnecessary to formally express acceptance for an enforceable contract where other circumstances justify an inference of acceptance
• concluding the directory-advertising agreement did not require the signature of the customer to be effective, and that Ohio Bell was justified in believing that the doctor had accepted the terms and conditions of the written agreement
• noting the following exception: “where the relation between the parties justifies the offeror’s expectation of a reply, such silence may constitute an acceptance on the part of the offeree”
• stating that “it is well-established that courts will give effect to the manifest intent of the parties where there is clear evidence demonstrating that the parties did not intend to be bound by the terms of an agreement until formalized in a written document and signed by both”
• upholding liability provision, stating it was an attempt to avoid indeterminable future liabilities
• enforcing a contract though one party did not sign it in the space provided, stating, \[s]ignature spaces in the form contract do not in and of themselves require that the signatures of the parties are a condition precedent to the agreement's enforceability\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).