Legal Opinion

McCormick v. Hoyt

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 2, 1959No. 34621PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosellini, J.

This is an action by the appellant to recover the balance of the price of “one lot of clocks and clock materials” sold to the respondents. The respondents cross-complained, alleging that the merchandise was faulty in that many of the clocks were without works and other materials were unusable. The respondents asked for rescission of the contract and for a return of the payments they had made. The trial court found that under the circumstances of the sale, there was an implied warranty of merchantability, which was breached, and awarded the respondents a judgment of rescission of the contract.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Salzman v. MaldaverMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Bailey Trading Co. v. LevyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  3. American Soda Fountain Co. v. Medford Grocery Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Williams v. S. H. Kress & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Frisken v. Art Strand Floor Coverings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1955

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Boeing Co. v. RooneyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  2. Panorama Village Homeowners v. Golden RuleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  3. Kirk v. Stineway Drug Store Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1963
  4. Arrow Transportation Co. v. A. O. Smith Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Voelker v. JosephWashington Supreme Court · 1963

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API