Massillon Engine & Thresher Co. v. Holdridge
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action by the Massillon Engine & Thresher Company against Ed. Churchill and 0. S. Holdridge. The action was dismissed as to Hold-ridge, and from an order of the district court for Winona county, Gould, J., denying its motion for a new trial, plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
This action was brought against the respondent and one Churchill to recover the purchase price of a boiler engine.
The complaint alleged that the defendants "agreed in writing” to purchase the engine from the plaintiff, and to pay therefor $1,100, delivered on board the cars at St. Paul, billed to the defendants at St. Charles; that the defendants received and accepted the engine at St. Charles, but refused to pay for the same, or execute their promissory notes therefor, according to the terms of "said written contract.” The answer of the defendant Holdridge consisted of a general denial, and…
2Cited by5 opinions
- D'Autremont v. Anderson Iron Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Scheifert v. BriegelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- White v. Himmelberger-Harrison Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. PeirceIndiana Court of Appeals · 1904
- McGinty v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898