Legal Opinion

Prime Manufacturing Co. v. Allen-Hough Carryola Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1933PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed November 9, 1932:

Fairchild, J.

The learned trial judge in his comprehensive opinion says:

“As to the answers made by the jury respecting the representations that the junior motors were capable of playing two ten-inch records and that the master motors were capable of playing three ten-inch records without rewinding, the court is of the opinion that it appears without contra*79diction that the defendant had sufficient opportunity to test the capacity of said motors and could easily have discovered any failure of the motors to play the number of records respectively…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Jacobsen v. WhitelyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Barndt v. FrederickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Swoboda v. RubinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Brustman v. DunnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Williams v. Rank & Son Buick, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Sciano v. HengleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Jandrt v. Milwaukee Auto InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Sullivan v. BakerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Williams v. Rank & Son Buick, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969

1 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