Legal Opinion

Adam Kroehle's Sons Co. v. Rockford Oak Leather Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1927No. Docket No. 51PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSnow, J.

(after stating the facts). Whether or not the hides furnished complied with the contract and warranty is in dispute. But the question is unimportant, since plaintiff accepted the rejected pieces and is demanding payment only for those retained and used by the defendant. Assuming, however, they were not all of the quality contracted, what, then, were the rights of the buyer? It had the right to reject the whole. It also had the right to; reject those not in accord with the contract and accept those that were. These rights are given it .by statute. See uniform sales act (3 Comp. Laws 1915, §…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hubbardston Lumber Co. v. BatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Walter-Wallingford Coal Co. v. A. Himes Coal Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1923

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Gloeser v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API