Trenton Terra Cotta Co. v. Clay Shingle Co.

Decision Date20 April 1897
CitationTrenton Terra Cotta Co. v. Clay Shingle Co., 80 F. 46 (D. N.J. 1897)
PartiesTRENTON TERRA COTTA CO. v. CLAY SHINGLE CO.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

Geo. W Macpherson and John T. Bird, for complainants.

Linton Satterthwait, for defendants.

KIRKPATRICK District Judge.

This bill is filed to reform a contract entered into between the Trenton Terra Cotta Company, the complainants herein, and the Clay Shingle Company, the defendants, bearing date January 29, 1892. It appears from the evidence in the cause that the defendants, residents of the state of Indiana, were the owners of a patent for the manufacture of clay shingles, and were desirous of having their shingles manufactured and sold on royalty in the Eastern markets. To that end they entered into negotiations with the Trenton Terra Cotta Company, who owned a large plant in Trenton, N.J., suitable for the purpose, and some time in the latter part of the year 1891 submitted a form of agreement in which it was, among other things, provided that the Clay Shingle Company should give the Trenton Terra Cotta Company the right to manufacture their patented tile at Trenton, N.J., and the exclusive right to sell and use the same in the states of New Jersey and Delaware, and the right to sell and use (not exclusive) in the state of New York; the Trenton Company to pay $2,000 as an advance on the royalty when the papers were executed. For this advance no condition was imposed as to the amount of tile to be made in 1892, but during every year after 1892 the said Trenton Company was to be required to make not less than 3,000 squares, or pay the royalty on that amount. The said proposed agreement also provided that the price of the tile sold by the Trenton Company should not be less than $6.50 per square delivered upon the cars or wagons at their factory and that there should be paid the Clay Shingle Company a royalty of 50 cents per square for each 100 square feet of tiles made at their factory, and sold within the allotted territory. This proposition, as a whole, was not satisfactory to the Trenton Company. In a letter dated December 30, 1891, they stated their objections to be the payment of $2,000 for advance royalties, the time when the payment of royalties should begin, and their failure to obtain the exclusive right of sale in the state of New York as well as in the states of New Jersey and Delaware. In this same letter they returned to the Clay Shingle Company the copy of the proposed agreement which had been submitted to them. On January 1, 1892, the Clay Shingle Company replying to the letter of the Trenton Company of December 30, 1891, receded from their demand for the $2,000 for advance royalties. They say they do not care about the Trenton Company binding themselves to a fixed royalty inside of two years, provided they will agree to make all the tiles necessary to supply the demand, and use business facilities to create a demand; and they have no objection to giving the exclusive right to sell and use in New York, as well as in New Jersey and Delaware, if they (the Trenton Company) would supply the demand. In fact, they would be glad to have the Trenton Company take all the New England states as well upon the same terms. Nothing was said in this correspondence by either of the parties as to the other terms of the proposed contract except that Mr. Elder, speaking for the Clay Shingle Company, says:

'If I had about two hours talk with you, I think I could convince you that there is nothing in the agreement but what is just and right, giving you ample rights in the manufacture and sale of tile, and guarding our interests in a way that is right and proper.'

Up to this point in the negotiations it will be observed that no suggestion had been made that the number of squares which the Trenton Company should manufacture each year or pay the royalty upon should exceed the 3,000 squares provided for in the original pro...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
4 cases
  • Wheeler v. Boyer Fire Apparatus Company, a Corp.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • May 13, 1933
    ... ... Trenton Terra Cotta Co. v. Clay Shingle Co. 80 F ... 46; Baldwin ... ...
  • Black v. Baskins
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • May 13, 1905
    ...was he entitled to a reformation of his contract, there being no mutual mistake. 24 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2d Ed.) 648-9, 650; 39 Ark. 304; 80 F. 46; 43 N.E. 259; s. c. 146 Ind. 322; S.W. 62; Bish. Cont. §§ 707-8; 142 U.S. 417; 66 Ark. 155; 50 S.W. 62. Laches would bar any such relief if appe......
  • Carrell v. McMurray
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas
    • March 25, 1905
    ... ... 295 et ... seq., 10 Sup.Ct. 1019, 34 L.Ed. 408; Trenton Terra Cotta ... Co. v. Clay Shingle Co. (C.C.) 80 F. 46; ... ...
  • Chicago & A. Ry. Co. v. Green
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • January 1, 1902
    ... ... Insurance Co., 98 U.S. 88, 25 L.Ed. 52; Trenton ... Terra Cotta Co. v. Clay Shingle Co. (C.C.) 80 F. 46 ... ...