Legal Opinion
Holcomb & Hoke Manufacturing Co. v. Osterberg
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 28, 1930No. 28,138PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCoring, J.
In a suit upon a note given for a popcorn and peanut machine, the defendant had a verdict upon the theory of rescission of the sale. This is an appeal from an order denying plaintiffs’ alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.
The defendant on January 12, 1927, bought from the plaintiff manufacturing company, hereinafter called the company, a combination corn popping and peanut roasting machine for use in connection with his restaurant business.
The contract of purchase was in writing signed by both parties, the company signing by its salesman. It provided that:
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Zimmerman v. Robinson & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- In re Van NormanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Kelsey v. J. W. Ringrose Net Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Fratt v. Fiske & LoringCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
3Cited by7 opinions
- Russo v. WilliamsNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
- Heibel v. United States Air Conditioning Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
- Hemming v. Ald, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Federal Motor Truck Sales Corp. v. ShanusSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
- Laundry Service Co. v. Fidelity Laundry MacHinery & Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.