Skip to main content
· 10/13/1911

Perolin Co. of America v. Young

Citations

  • 65 Wash. 300
  • 118 P. 1
  • 1911 Wash. LEXIS 918

Syllabus

<p>Appeal — Review—Harmless Error — Favorable to Appellant— Cross-Appeal. Error in excluding a counterclaim is not prejudicial to the plaintiff, and will not be considered on plaintiff’s appeal, in the absence of a cross-appeal by defendant.</p> <p>Damages — Breach of Contract — Contemplated Profits • — ■ Counterclaim. Where a contract necessarily contemplated profits to be made by the defendant from the sale of an article manufactured from a secret formulae, substantial damages arising from the loss of profits by reason of plaintiff’s breach are recoverable by way of counterclaim.</p> <p>Continuance — Surprise—To Obtain Rebuttal Evidence — Discretion. In an action on a contract whereby the plaintiff had agreed to furnish secret formulae for the manufacture of an article, and defendant’s answer specifically denied that the same was furnished, it is not an abuse of discretion to refuse plaintiff a continuance in order to obtain rebuttal evidence on the issue, the answer indicating that defendant would deny that the formulae had been furnished, as testified by the witness for the plaintiff, and it appearing by subsequent letters that repeated demands had been made for the formulae, which the plaintiff agreed to furnish.</p> <p>Contracts — Performance or Breach — Evidence — Sufficiency. The evidence sufficiently shows that the plaintiff breached its contract to furnish the defendant with its secret formulae for a sweeping compound called “Perolin,” where it appears that, after its manager had given preliminary directions for a compound composed largely of sand, and promised to send the formulae, the plaintiff, in response to demands, repeatedly promised to send all its secret formulae, which it advertised to contain no sand, but failed to send any.</p> <p>Contracts — Performance or Breach — Partial Performance — • Quantum Meruit — Right to. In an action upon promissory notes given in consideration of plaintiff’s agreement to furnish defendant its secret formulae for th

Judges: Crow

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.