Legal Opinion

Evans & Tate v. Premier Refining Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 5, 1923No. 15015PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The defendants, having pleaded a written contract which amounted to an express warranty, could not rely upon an implied warranty, and they could not show that the lubricant was worthless unless they also showed that they had complied with the conditions named in *305the contract (International Harvester Co. v. Dillon, 126 Ga. 672, 55 S. E. 1034), and the undisputed evidence showed that the defendants had not complied with the express stipulation in the contract that no claim for replacing broken gears could be allowed them unless their account with the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. International Harvester Co. of America v. DillonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ollendorff Watch Co. v. PinkNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  2. Mein v. United States Car Testing Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1961
  3. Ollendorff Watch Co. v. PinkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API