Gale Manufacturing Co. v. Cribb
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the County Court of Milwaukee Countjr. Action upon an account for plows sold to the defendant. The answer denies any indebtedness and sets up two counterclaims : one based upon a breach by the plaintiff of its contract of warranty of the plows, and containing a statement of various items of damage caused by such breach; the second alleging that the plaintiff shipped twenty-five cultivators to the defendant, for which the latter paid $10 each, the plaintiff…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the County Court of Milwaukee Countjr. Action upon an account for plows sold to the defendant. The answer denies any indebtedness and sets up two counterclaims : one based upon a breach by the plaintiff of its contract of warranty of the plows, and containing a statement of various items of damage caused by such breach; the second alleging that the plaintiff shipped twenty-five cultivators to the defendant, for which the latter paid $10 each, the plaintiff agreeing to take back what the defendant could not sell; that he was unable to sell and had offered to return fifteen of said…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, C. J.
The point was made on the argument that the clause in the first contract, “ the above plows are warranted to do good work,” did not refer to any other plows than those first shipped and enumerated in the agreement. But to our minds it is very clear that the warranty covered all plows which were furnished on the contract. The agreement manifestly contemplated orders for, and shipments of, plows from time to time, as the demands of trade in the territory designated should require. The time and manner of payment for plows delivered on the contract are specified. There would be as much reason in…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Winkler v. PattenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883