American Seating Company v. Zell
| Decision Date | 08 May 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 613,613 |
| Citation | 64 S.Ct. 1053,88 L.Ed. 1552,322 U.S. 709 |
| Parties | AMERICAN SEATING COMPANY, petitioner, v. Lucian T. ZELL |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Wm. Dwight Whitney and Albert R. Connelly, both of New York City (Mr. John Logan O'Donnell, of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for petitioner.
Messrs. J. Edward Lumbard, Jr. and Theodore S. Hope, Jr., both of New York City (Messrs. Donovan, Leisure, Newton & Lumbard, and Ralstone R. Irvine, all of New York City, and Charles W. Sellers, of Cleveland, Ohio, of counsel), for respondent.
On writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
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, 17 L.Ed. 868; Hazelton v. Sheckells, 202 U.S. 71, 79, 26 S.Ct. 567, 568, 50 L.Ed. 939, 6 Ann.Cas. 217; Executive Order No. 9001, Tit. II, par. 5, 6 Fed.Reg. 6788, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix § 611 note; War Department Procurement Regulations, 10 Code Fed.Reg. (Cum.Supp.) sec. 81.1181. The judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals is reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Wade v. Mayo
-
Kerwin v. Kerwin
...Holdsworth, 264 Mass. 303, 309, 162 N.E. 334; Williston, Contracts (Rev. ed. 1936) §§ 210, 212. 6. The Zell case was reversed in 322 U.S. 709, 64 S.Ct. 1053, by a divided court, two justices voting to affirm, four justices holding that recovery by the plaintiff upon the oral addition to the......
-
In re Greives
...the parol evidence rule. Zell v. American Seating Co., 138 F.2d 641 (2d Cir.1943), rev'd on other grounds per curiam, 322 U.S. 709, 64 S.Ct. 1053, 88 L.Ed. 1552, (1944); Rock-Ola Mfg. Co. v. Wertz, 282 F.2d 208 (4th Cir.1960); Vanston v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co., 482 F.2d 337 (5th ......
-
Rogers v. Grimaldi
...881, 884 (8th Cir.1969); Zell v. American Seating Co., 138 F.2d 641, 643 n. 6 (2d Cir.1943), rev'd on other grounds, 322 U.S. 709, 64 S.Ct. 1053, 88 L.Ed. 1552 (1944); 1A Pt. 2 Moore's Federal Practice p 0.316 (1987), but is obliged to apply whatever substantive standards the forum state us......