Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Chattanooga Foundry And Pipe Works v. City Of Atlanta

• 1906 • 203 U.S. 390 • Fuller Court
In the 1906 case of Chattanooga Foundry and Pipe Works v. City of Atlanta, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the City of Atlanta. The dispute arose when Chattanooga Foundry and Pipe Works sued for breach of contract after Atlanta refused to pay for water pipes that were delivered late due to a strike at the foundry's plant. The city had contracted with another company to supply its needs during this delay, arguing it was necessary due to public health concerns related to their water...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Fuller Court
Term: 1906
Docket: 94
203 U.S. 390
27 S. Ct. 65
51 L. Ed. 241
1906 U.S. LEXIS 1603
Argued: Nov 09, 1906

Chattanooga Foundry And Pipe Works v. City Of Atlanta

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1906 case of Chattanooga Foundry and Pipe Works v. City of Atlanta, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the City of Atlanta. The dispute arose when Chattanooga Foundry and Pipe Works sued for breach of contract after Atlanta refused to pay for water pipes that were delivered late due to a strike at the foundry's plant. The city had contracted with another company to supply its needs during this delay, arguing it was necessary due to public health concerns related to their water supply system. The court held that while ordinarily a party who breaks a contract must compensate the other party for any loss incurred as a result, there are exceptions where performance becomes impossible or impracticable through no fault of either party - such as an unexpected event like labor strikes which could not have been foreseen or avoided by reasonable diligence and prudence on part of contractor (Chattanooga). Thus, under these circumstances, non-performance is excused without liability. This decision established an important precedent in American law regarding impossibility defense in contracts: if unforeseeable events make contractual obligations impossible or unreasonably burdensome then parties may be relieved from their duties without penalty.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Chattanooga Foundry and Pipe Works v. City of Atlanta, Justice Harlan argued that the city of Atlanta did not have a right to impose conditions on its water contracts that would limit competition or discriminate against out-of-state businesses. He believed this was in violation of the Commerce Clause, which gives Congress exclusive power over interstate commerce. Harlan maintained that while states do have some authority to regulate local matters impacting commerce indirectly, they cannot directly control or restrict it in favor of local interests at the expense of out-of-state entities. In his view, Atlanta's actions were an unconstitutional interference with interstate trade because they effectively barred non-local companies from competing fairly for municipal contracts.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Dec 03, 1906
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms