Legal Opinion

National Novelty Import Co. v. Ellis

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 12, 1920PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Howard Circuit Court; James 8. Steel, Judge; 1. The court erred in not directing a verdict for plaintiff, for defendant admits tbat part of tbe goods were of equal quality of the samples shown him, but he failed to show how many and the value or price thereof. The burden was on defendant to show the number of items and the price of each item, and he has failed.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Howard Circuit Court; James 8. Steel, Judge; 1. The court erred in not directing a verdict for plaintiff, for defendant admits tbat part of tbe goods were of equal quality of the samples shown him, but he failed to show how many and the value or price thereof. The burden was on defendant to show the number of items and the price of each item, and he has failed. Appellee did not follow or pursue the remedy provided in the written contract, and could make the defense admitted by the court over appellant’s objections, and it was error to refuse appellant’s instructions Nos. 2 and 3.…

1Opinion of the CourtHumphreys, J.

Appellant instituted suit against appellee in the mayor’s court at Nashville, to recover $198 for a showcase and jewelry sold by appellant to appellee through its saleman, P. H. Lea. The sale was evidenced by a written order with contract attached, setting out each item sold and the price therefor. The contract made the basis of the suit embraced 33 lots of novelties, each lot containing many items, valued separately, and agregating $19i8. One paragraph of the contract, designated “warranty,” is as follows: “Should any article of jewery fail to give satisfaction as to workmanship, quality or…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Pratt v. MetzgerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Myers v. MartinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API