Remsberg v. Hackney Manufacturing Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. John M. York, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
Plaintiff is the owner of 160 acres of farm land in Los Angeles County. The defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of Minnesota, and engaged in the manufacture and sale of the “Hackney Auto Plow,” a gas-engine tractor advertised and sold for the purpose and use of plowing, hauling, and operating farm machinery. In 1912 the parties entered into a contract for the purchase '¡by plaintiff of one of these implements. The auto plow was shipped to plaintiff who paid the full purchase price. Finding that the machine did not give the service which, as he contended, he had a right to…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Olcese v. Justice's Court of the First Judicial Twp.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Simon v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Harrison v. McCormickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Security Loan & Trust Co. v. Boston & South Riverside Fruit Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- McCorkle v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- American Suzuki Motor Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Amen v. Merced County Title Co.California Supreme Court · 1962
- Jardine v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- California Dental Assn. v. American Dental Assn.California Supreme Court · 1979
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.