Oltman v. . Williams
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from Lyon, J., at June Term, 1914, of Obange. TMs is a civil action brought to recover on the purcbase-money notes given for a German coaching stallion.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from Lyon, J., at June Term, 1914, of Obange. TMs is a civil action brought to recover on the purcbase-money notes given for a German coaching stallion. These issues were submitted to the jury: 1. Did tbe plaintiffs warrant the horse, as alleged in the answer? Answer: Yes. 2. Was there a breach of said warranty by the plaintiffs? Answer: Yes. 3. Did the defendants offer to return the horse on or before 1 March, 1909? Answer: No. 4. What amount, if any, are the plaintiffs entitled to recover of the defendants? Answer: $432, with interest, towit, $164.16. 5. What amount, if…
1Opinion of the CourtBeowN, J.
The defendants set up two defenses: first, that the notes were procured by fraud; second, that there was a breach of an express warranty, for which they claim damages.(1) We agree with his Honor that there was not sufficient evidence of fraud to. justify the submission of that issue to the jury. It is well settled that where evidence raises no more than a mere conjecture of fraud or negligence, it is error to submit the issue to the jury. Maguire v. R. R., 154 N. C., 385, and cases cited.
At the time of the sale of the horse the only representations that were made were merely commendatory, and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cash Register Co. v. . TownsendSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Wilson v. Nichols & Shepherd Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
- W. F. Main Co. v. FieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Chas. Hackley Piano Co. v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Robinson v. . HuffstetlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Frick Co. v. BolesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915