Swift & Co. v. Etheridge
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtCoNNOR, J.
Defendant did not insist upon the counterclaim, as set up in his answer, at the trial of this action. He tendered no issues involving the matters relied upon in support of his counterclaim. There was neither allegation nor proof that the fertilizers purchased by defendant of the plaintiffs had been subjected to a chemical analysis, showing a deficiency of ingredients, which is made, by statute, a prerequisite to a suit for damages, resulting from the use of the fertilizers; C. S., 4697. Defendant could not, therefore, have maintained an action to recover such damages; Jones v. Guano Co., 183…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Jones v. Union Guano Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Ashford v. H. C. Shrader Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Hunt v. . EureSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Piner v. . BrittainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Carter v. . McGillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Mary Pickford Co. v. Bayly Bros., Inc.California Supreme Court · 1939
- Performance Motors, Incorporated v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Aldridge Motors, Inc. v. . AlexanderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Mills v. BoninSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Holland v. . WhittingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.