Fitzpatrick v. D. M. Osborne & Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant, D. M. Osborne & Co., a corporation, from an order of the District Court of Murray County, P.E. Brown, J., made October 1, 1891, denying its motion for a new trial. In July, 1885, defendant delivered to plaintiff James Fitzpatrick a. binder on trial. After testing it, plaintiff claimed it did not work properly.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant, D. M. Osborne & Co., a corporation, from an order of the District Court of Murray County, P.E. Brown, J., made October 1, 1891, denying its motion for a new trial. In July, 1885, defendant delivered to plaintiff James Fitzpatrick a. binder on trial. After testing it, plaintiff claimed it did not work properly. It was then agreed between the parties that plaintiff should purchase the machine and give his negotiable notes for it, and that defendant should repair it, and fix it so that it would do good work the next season. If defendant failed to do so, plaintiff need not…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
There was clearly no error in refusing defendants’ application for a continuance. ' The plaintiff first took the harvester on trial. It proved defective, and would not do good work, and plaintiff refused to purchase it. Thereupon, in consideration of an undertaking of defendants that they would repair and fix it so that it would do good work the next season, the plaintiff bought it, and gave his negotiable promissory notes for the purchase price.
*263This undertaking on part of the defendants was what may be termed an “express promissory warranty” against the consequences of the then known defects…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Frohreich v. GammonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Mandel v. ButtlesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Thoreson v. Minneapolis Harvester WorksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
- Schurmeier v. EnglishSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
3Cited by15 opinions
- Feeney & Bremer Co. v. StoneOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Nave v. PowellIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
- Kingman & Co. v. WatsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
- Obenchain Boyer v. Incorporated Town of RoffSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- C. H. Dean Co. v. StandiferCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.