Legal Opinion

James v. Bekkedahl

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 9, 1901PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from District Court, Traill County; Pollock, J. Action by Samuel A. James, doing business as S. A. James & Co., against Lewis Bekkedahl. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. cited Laybourne v. Seymour, 54 N. W. Rep. 941; Jones v. Strode, 41 S. W. Rep. 562. Appellant could not retain the gloves and claim damages for breach of contract. The warranty required him to return the gloves that did not give satisfaction. This he did not do. Plano Mfg.

Read the full summary

1Opinion of the CourtMorgan, J.

Plaintiff has sued the defendant to recover a judgment for the value of certain gloves sold' to him in July, 1899. The answer admits the sale of the gloves, but alleges as a counterclaim that the ladies’ gloves so sold were sold under a special warranty, and that the men’s gloves were sold to be as good in quality as samples shown at the time of the sale. ,The answer further alleges that there was a breach of the express warranty in the sale of the ladies’ gloves, as well as a breach of the implied warranty in the sale of the men’s gloves, to his damage. Plaintiff denies the allegations of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

Parks v. . Morris Ax and Tool Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
Minnesota Thresher Manufacturing Co. v. HansonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by2 opinions

Bell Bros. v. RobinsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1916
Gould Balance Valve Co. v. HeroldNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913