Legal Opinion

Hoe v. Sanborn

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 15, 1860Published

^Appeal from the general tferm of the Supreme Qour^ j[n the fourth -district, where a judgment upon a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs had been affirmed. This was an action upon a promissory note, dated the 17th August 1855, whereby the defendant promised to -pay to the plaintiffs, the sum of $467.88, five months after date, at the Washington County Bank. The defence was a failure of consideration.

Read the full summary

^Appeal from the general tferm of the Supreme Qour^ j[n the fourth -district, where a judgment upon a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs had been affirmed. This was an action upon a promissory note, dated the 17th August 1855, whereby the defendant promised to -pay to the plaintiffs, the sum of $467.88, five months after date, at the Washington County Bank. The defence was a failure of consideration. The answer averred that the defendant purchased of the plaintiffs a quantity of circular saws, for the price of which the note in question was given; .that the plaintiffs warranted them to bo “…

1Opinion of the CourtSelden, J.

If, to sustain the defence in this case, it was necessary to show that the plaintiffs had agreed to manufacture these saws for a specific purpose, and that, when tried, one or more of them proved not to be adapted to or useful for that purpose, then the rulings of the judge upon the trial may have been right. Such a contract would be entirely different from an ordinary sale, with a general warranty of quality, and would require to be specially stated; but, on the other hand, if, upon every sale of a manufactured article by the manu*596facturor himself, there is an implied warranty that the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Moses v. MeadCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
  2. Hargous v. . StoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
  3. Van Bracklin v. FondaNew York Supreme Court · 1815
  4. Bartlett v. . HoppockNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  5. Divine v. McCormickNew York Supreme Court · 1867

4 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