Legal Opinion
Bayliss v. Hennessey
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided June 12, 1880PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Appeal from Wi/rmeshieh District Cov/rt. Action to recover tbe purchase price of a “ Massilon Harvester” sold and delivered by tbe plaintiff to tbe defendant. Trial by tbe court, a finding of facts and judgment for tbe plaintiff. The defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtServers, J.
struotion°of contract. Tbe contract of purchase and warranty was in writing. Tbe defendant contracted to pay two hundred dollars for tbe machine, as follows: “ Cash $22, an reaPer;note $95, due November 1,1877, with interest at teu per cent per annum, provided tbe machine was as warranted,” but if it proved not to be, “ after notice and trial as stipulated in tbe warranty,” then tbe defendant was to return it to tbe place of delivery. Tbe warranty was as follows:
“When tbe machine is put in operation, if it should fail to perform as warranted, it shall be tbe duty of tbe purchaser to notify us…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Murphy v. Russell & Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1901
- Russell & Co. v. MurdockSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Wendall v. Osborne & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1884