Excelsior Supply Co. v. Charles A. Stickney Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the municipal court of St. Paul to recover $66.75 balance of the purchase price of certain goods sold and delivered. The answer alleged that by mutual agreement the sale of the goods was rescinded and the goods returned to and accepted and retained by appellant. The reply was a denial. The case was tried before Finehout, J., who made findings of fact and as conclusion of law found in favor of defendant.
Read the full summary
Action in the municipal court of St. Paul to recover $66.75 balance of the purchase price of certain goods sold and delivered. The answer alleged that by mutual agreement the sale of the goods was rescinded and the goods returned to and accepted and retained by appellant. The reply was a denial. The case was tried before Finehout, J., who made findings of fact and as conclusion of law found in favor of defendant. Prom an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial, it appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtO’Brien, J.
The appellant, a corporation engaged in wholesale merchandising at Chicago, on April 30, 1907, sold and delivered to respondent one hundred manufactured appliances, used in gasolene engines, and known as “Jewel spark plugs.” The plugs were manufactured by Pittsfield Spark Coil Company, of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, and put up in boxes at the factory, marked, “Guaranteed 90 days.” On June 19, 1907, the respondent, upon the claim that the same were *47defective, shipped to the manufacturer, the Pittsfield Company,, eighty-nine of the plugs, together with twenty-nine other plugs manufactured by the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Schutz v. TostoveSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934