Rumsey v. Sargent
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated August 19, 1849, for fifteen dollars, payable to Charles A. Keen, Jr., or bearer, on or before the first of November, 1849, with interest, and by the payee transferred and delivered to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated August 19, 1849, for fifteen dollars, payable to Charles A. Keen, Jr., or bearer, on or before the first of November, 1849, with interest, and by the payee transferred and delivered to the plaintiff. Upon the general issue, the defendant introduced evidence tending to prove that the note was given for the price of a pump, put up for him by Keen, and that pursuant to their agreement, at the time the note was made, Keen gave the defendant a written contract as follows: “ This may certify that I have this day set up a pump for Joseph Sargent, and do warrant…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, C. J.
In the case of Reed v. Prentiss, 1 N. H. Rep. 176, where an article is sold with a warranty as to its quality, it is said by Woodhury, J., that a breach of warranty subjects the vendor to pay all that is lost by the breach, and suffering the vendee to avail himself of this breach in answer to a suit for the consideration, prevents circuity of action, and produces no difference in the estimation of the damages. The principle seems to be, that as the article received is not the kind of article agreed for, the expected consideration for the note never passed.
In this case the purchaser has not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- M'Allister v. ReabNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Reed v. PrentissSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1818