Warder v. Fisher
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Omwford County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Tatloe: “ This action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover tbe value of a reaper which they allege the defendant purchased of them, and for which he agreed to pay the sum of $145. The defendant by his answer denies that he ever purchased the reaper of the plaintiffs, and alleges that it was delivered to him by the plaintiffs on trial, with the agreement that if he was not satisfied…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Omwford County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Tatloe: “ This action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover tbe value of a reaper which they allege the defendant purchased of them, and for which he agreed to pay the sum of $145. The defendant by his answer denies that he ever purchased the reaper of the plaintiffs, and alleges that it was delivered to him by the plaintiffs on trial, with the agreement that if he was not satisfied with it they would take it away again; and tliat after trial he notified the plaintiffs that he was not satisfied with…
1Opinion of the CourtTaylou, J.
The evidence being-conflicting upon the principal issues in the case, it was important that the jury should be carefully instructed as to the rights of the parties under the two different theories of the.,cáse. The learned circuit judge very properly instructed the jury, that if they found in favor of the defendant’s theory, -fh^t he took the machine rrpon trial, to be taken away by ithe’ plaintiffs if he was not satisfied with it, then there was no sale, and the plaintiffs *340could not recover. He’also very properly instructed the jury, that if they found in favor of the plaintiffs’ theory,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Conner v. HendersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
- Fisk v. TankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
- Morehouse v. ComstockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- Getty v. RountreeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1850
- Wynn v. HidayIndiana Supreme Court · 1828
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Heddles v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- J. I. Case Plow Works v. Niles & Scott Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- J. Thompson Manufacturing Co. v. GundersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Erickson v. Westfield Milling & Electric Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Lenz v. BlakeOregon Supreme Court · 1904
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.