Legal Opinion

Fertilizer Works v. . Aiken

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 17, 1918PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The action was instituted in the City Court and was to recover the amount of a promissory note for $458.04, bearing date 1 May, 1916, and due on or before 1 October, 1916. After the direct promise to pay the amount of said note and interest, the same proceeded as follows:

The consideration of this note is:

100 sacks 8-3-2 . . . . . . . . . . ..........sacks..... 40 sacks cotton-seed meal, 7 1/2 cents, .....sacks..... 3 sacks nitrate of soda, 18 cents ..........sacks.....

I hereby acknowledge I have received and used the above fertilizer without any guarantee on the part of Armour Fertilizer…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. De Witt v. BerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Swift & Co. v. AydlettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Loxtercamp v. Lininger Implement Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910
  4. Tomlinson & Co. v. MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  5. Stacey Cheese Co. v. PipkinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Lilley v. Manning Motor CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API