Farris v. Ware
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. Assumpsit to recover for the labor and materials, amounting to $1,599.28, expended by the plaintiff in repairing the ‘ Ware Tannery ’ in Athens in this State. The writ was dated Aug. 80, 1869, and contained a special count, count on an account annexed, count for money laid out and expended, and a count for labor and materials .furnished. Plea general issue.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. Assumpsit to recover for the labor and materials, amounting to $1,599.28, expended by the plaintiff in repairing the ‘ Ware Tannery ’ in Athens in this State. The writ was dated Aug. 80, 1869, and contained a special count, count on an account annexed, count for money laid out and expended, and a count for labor and materials .furnished. Plea general issue. The plaintiff introduced a bond dated May 4, 1869, in the penal sum of $9,000, given hy the defendant to the plaintiff, obligating himself to convey to the plaintiff the ‘ Ware Tannery ’ and certain land-rights,…
1Opinion of the CourtWalton, J.
The plaintiff was nonsuited at nisiprius upon the ground that the facts which he offered to prove, though sufficient to maintain an action on the case for deceit, were not sufficient to support an action of assumpsit.
The plaintiff’s case, as he offered to prove it, is substantially this : He says that the defendant was possessed of a tannery which he was anxious to sell to him ; that to induce him to buy it, the defendant represented that the water-power connected with it was sufficient to work it continuously throughout the year; that having no knowledge of the capacity of the water-power…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Engeman v. TaylorWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1899
- Mundt v. SimpkinsNebraska Supreme Court · 1908
- Linderman Machine Co. v. Hillenbrand Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1921
- Waldman Produce, Inc. v. Frigidaire Corp.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1935
- Kanson Hat & Cap Mfg. Co. v. J. D. Blakeney & SonMississippi Supreme Court · 1926