Legal Opinion

Bekkevold v. Potts

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 2, 1927No. 26,309PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Wilson, C. JV

Defendants appealed from an order denying their alternative-motion for judgment non obstante or a new trial.

The action is to recover money paid upon the purchase price of a Fordson tractor, a two-wheel truck used as a trailer, a connecting hitch and a hydraulic hoist for unloading.

1 and 2. The contract of sale contained a printed provision: “No warranties have been made in reference to said motor vehicle by the seller to the buyer unless expressly written hereon at the date of purchase.” None were written thereon.

The proofs, received over the objection that it was in violation of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Kellogg Bridge Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Hoe v. . SanbornNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  3. Minneapolis Threshing MacH. Co. v. HockingNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Ross v. Northrup, King & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Dowagiac Manufacturing Co. v. MahonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  2. Ritchie v. Anchor Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Beck v. SpindlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  4. Despatch Oven Co. v. RauenhorstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
  5. Clements Auto Co. v. Service Bureau Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1971

48 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