Legal Opinion

Robinson v. . Huffstetler

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 6, 1914PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Appeal by defendant from Webb, J., at October Special Term, 1913, of G-astoN. This action is to recover two mules. Tbe plaintiff testified in substance that be and tbe defendant exchanged mules; tbat tbe defendant warranted bis mules to be sound, and agreed tbat if tbey were not sound tbe plaintiff might return them, and get bis own mules; tbat tbe mules were not sound, and tbat be offered to rescind tbe trade on tbe eighth day after tbe exchange.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendant from Webb, J., at October Special Term, 1913, of G-astoN. This action is to recover two mules. Tbe plaintiff testified in substance that be and tbe defendant exchanged mules; tbat tbe defendant warranted bis mules to be sound, and agreed tbat if tbey were not sound tbe plaintiff might return them, and get bis own mules; tbat tbe mules were not sound, and tbat be offered to rescind tbe trade on tbe eighth day after tbe exchange. Tbe contention of tbe plaintiff is that tbe warranty is one of quality; tbat be bad a reasonable time within which to examine tbe mules; tbat be…

1Opinion of the Court

AlleN, J\

When personal property is sold by sample, or upon a representation as to quality, which does not amount to an express warranty, tbe purchaser is given a reasonable opportunity' for inspection and examination, and if not according to tbe sample or representation, be may reject them wben tendered, or return them after delivéry, provided be acts within a reasonable time, and can recover anything of'value parted with as tbe consideration for tbe trade.

What is a reasonable time is dependent upon conditions and circumstances, as in some cases tbe defect may be discovered by inspection,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Parker v. Fenwick.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  2. Manufacturing Co. v. . GraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
  3. Critcher v. Porter Company.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Hampton Guano Co. v. Hill Live-Stock Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Farquhar Co. v. Hardy Hardware Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  3. Winn v. . FinchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  4. McCaskey Register Co. v. BradshawSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  5. Frick Co. v. BolesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915

11 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