Legal Opinion

Howe Machine Co. v. Rosine

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1877PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Knox county; the Hon. Arthur A. Smith, Judge, presiding,

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Dickey

This is an action upon a promissory note of appellee, given to appellant for the price of a sewing machine. The testimony as to the consideration of the note is very contradictory. The testimony of appellee and his witnesses tends to show that the machine sold was an old machine, and that it was . sold to him as a new one; that certain parts, or appendages, of the machine were, by the contract for the sale, to be substituted by others to be furnished by appellant in their stead, which were not furnished, and that, on account of the machine being old, and the failure to furnish a new machine…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Rio Grande Southern Railroad v. CampbellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
  2. Cuneo Press v. Claybourn CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937
  3. Roby v. MurphyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1888
  4. Meyer v. LewisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
  5. Cobb v. Griffith & Adams Sand, Gravel, & Transportation Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1882

1 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