Legal Opinion

McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. Mackey

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 14, 1903Published

Appeal from Louisiana Court of Common Pleas. — Hon. David H. Ely, Judge. (1) There was an absolute and unconditional sale and delivery, of this machine to the defendant, with a conditional warranty.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Louisiana Court of Common Pleas. — Hon. David H. Ely, Judge. (1) There was an absolute and unconditional sale and delivery, of this machine to the defendant, with a conditional warranty. (2) By the contract of warranty, it was made a condition precedent to any liability of the plaintiff on account of the warranty, that the defendant should give a written notice to the plaintiff in Chicago, Illinois, or to its authorized agent, through whom the machine was purchased, stating wherein the machine fails to work well. (3) There was no such written notice given; in fact no claim or…

1Opinion of the CourtReyburn, J.

This action was brought before a justice of the peace upon a contract alleged to have been entered into for the purchase of a corn binder. After preliminary conversation between T. A. Cooper, plaintiff’s agent, and defendant, the latter signed and delivered to Cooper a. contract dated September 6, 1902, for the purchase of such machine, containing the following conditional warranties:

“McCormick Harvesting Machine Co., warrants this machine to do good'work, to be well made; of good materials, and to be durable if used with proper care. If upon one day’s trial the machine fails to work well,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Boyer v. NeelMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Craycroft v. W. G. Walker & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1887
  3. Deere, Mansur & Co. v. HuchtMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
  4. Kingman & Co. v. SchulenbergerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
  5. Weise v. Birdsall Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API