Advance-Rumely Thresher Co. v. Born
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*313The following opinion was filed January 12, 1926:
Rosenberry, J.
The principal contentions of the plaintiff are grouped under four heads. It is contended that the defendant cannot recover (1st) because he accepted the tractor by using the same twenty-two and one-half days and by his use of the tractor for a period of about two weeks after he wrote the plaintiff company stating that he condemned the tractor and that he would not keep it; (2d) because he failed to give notice of the breach of warranty as required by the contract; (3d) because he failed to give the second notice required by the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Astin v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Fox v. WilkinsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Bautz v. AdamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- J. L. Owens Co. v. WhitcombWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917
- J. B. Bradford Piano Co. v. BaalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Walter v. Four Wheel Drive Auto Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
- Arctic Engineering Corp. v. HarrisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
- Kloppstein v. FriesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1950