Legal Opinion

Powers v. Briggs

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 21, 1905No. Docket No. 166Published

Error to Eaton; Smith, J. Assumpsit by Seroll E. Powers against Albert Briggs for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

This action was brought to recover the price of a hay loader sold and delivered to the defendant. The defense was that the loader was bought under an express warranty that it would do good work and would load hay from windrows, and that, if it failed to do so, defendant might return it; that it did not answer the terms of the warranty; and that defendant returned it. There was a sharp contest on the trial. The circuit judge submitted to the jury the three questions: (1) Whether there was such a warranty as claimed; (2) whether defendant gave the machine a fair test within a reasonable time,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Prentis v. BatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Felt v. Reynolds Rotary Fruit Evaporating Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Childs v. O'DonnellMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API