Legal Opinion

Bateman v. Warfield

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 11, 1913No. 4208PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Attachment; from city court of Houston county—Judge Brunson. April 15, 1912.

1Opinion of the CourtRussell, J.

1. Where one sells another a jack, to be used for the purpose of breeding mules, there is an implied warranty that the jack is reasonably suited to the uses intended; and it follows that where suit was brought on a promissory note given for the purchase-price of such a jack, a plea setting up that the jack was impotent and totally' unsuited for the uses intended should not have béen stricken.

2. In such a case the defendant may plead a breach of such an implied warranty, notwithstanding it was stipulated in the note that the vendor “does not warrant the health or soundness of said animal.” It…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hirsch v. Schofield's Sons Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1910

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Alford v. KruseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  2. Watson v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
  3. Wallace v. BleakmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  4. Battle Bros. v. SherlockCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API