Keniston v. Todd
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Sioux District Court.— HoN. Wm. Hutchinson, Judge. ActioN at law to recover upon promissory notes given for tbe price of a threshing machine. Answer admitting the making of the notes and pleading payment, and counterclaim for damages or breach of warranty. Verdict and judgment for defendant on his counterclaim, and plaintiff appeals.—
1Opinion of the Court
Weaver, J.— I.
i. Sales: breach of warranty. Appellant questions the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a finding for the defendant; but the point is not well taken. The testimony on part of appellee fairly tends to show a warranty that the machine was in good condition and capable of doing good work. It also tends to show a breach of the warranty, and that the machine was of comparatively small value. There was no error, therefore, in submitting the case to the jury.
*2898. breach or waNer” par-mentfy *288II. The appellee having conceded on the trial that he *289made certain partial payments on the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gilmore v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- McClure v. WilliamsIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
- D. M. Osborne & Co. v. MarksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Berthold v. Seevers Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Nauman v. UllmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
3Cited by3 opinions
- Farmers State Bank v. CookSupreme Court of Iowa · 1960
- Smith & Nixon Co. v. MorganCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
- Breitenkamp v. Community Cooperative AssociationSupreme Court of Iowa · 1962