Milwaukee Tank Works v. Metals Coating Co. of America
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
The following opinion was filed April 3, 1928:
Stevens, J.(1) The first question presented is whether there was an implied warranty that the device would accomplish the purpose for which it was purchased. It was a special mechanism procured to perform a special service. This fact serves to distinguish the case from those in which the buyer purchases an article which is well known and defined in the commercial world, like a cream separator, a gang plow, or a vacuum cleaner. La Crosse Plow Co. v. Helgeson, 127 Wis. 622, 623, 106 N. W. 1094; La Crosse Plow Co. v. Brooks, 142 Wis. 640, 643, 644,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Boothby v. ScalesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Wunderlich v. Palatine Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Milwaukee Boiler Co. v. DuncanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
- Getty v. RountreeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1850
- Ohio Electric Co. v. Wisconsin-Minnesota Light & Power Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Goodwin Brothers Leasing, Inc. v. NousisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Holmes Packaging MacH. Corp. v. BinghamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Handy v. Holland Furnace Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- Robinson v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- State v. WhiteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.