Legal Opinion

Red Wing Manufacturing Co. v. Moe

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1885PublishedCited by 10 opinions

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Pierce County. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. The defendants appealed from the judgment.

1Opinion of the CourtOeton, J.

This action is to recover the unpaid balance of ■the purchase money for a stationary engine and boiler, and ■attachments. The contract of purchase was in writing, and *241signed by both parties, and states that the respondent company “ have this day sold to the said Moe Bros. the following property now in their possession, in said city of Red Wing, to wit, one stationary engine [and boiler, etc.], now used by said Red Wing Manufacturing Company in said city; the same to be taken down and made ready to load at the expense of said [company] to be ready for delivery to the said Moe Bros. on or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hubbard v. MarshallWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Fisk v. TankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
  3. Hahn v. DoolittleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1864
  4. Frey v. VanderhoofWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Medical City Dallas, Ltd. v. Carlisle Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 2008
  2. W. W. Kimball Co. v. MellonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Smith v. ColemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Parry Manufacturing Co. v. TobinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Nauman v. UllmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899

5 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