Legal Opinion

Gale Sulky Harrow Manufacturing Co. v. Moore

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 15, 1891PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from Harper District Court. Action upon a promissory note. Trial at the October term, 1888, and verdict for defendant, Moore. The plaintiff Company brings the case here. The facts appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Johnston, J.:

This action was brought upon a promissory note given by the defendant to the plaintiff for the purchase-price of a Gale sulky harrow and seeder. The note was executed June 8, 1885, for $65, and was payable September 1, 1886. The execution of the note was admitted, but the defendant claimed that the implement was sold with a warranty that it was well adapted to the work of seeding ground, that the material and workmanship of the same were first class in every particular, and that it would do the work in a satisfactory and farmer-like…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Cookingham v. DusaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pratt-Gilbert Co. v. RenaudArizona Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Brandtjen & Kluge, Inc. v. LucasSupreme Court of Kansas · 1941
  3. Hull v. Prairie Queen Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  4. Sylvester v. LyndeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1923
  5. Dotson v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1955

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API