Latham v. Hartford
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Reno District Court. . Action brought by Latham and another against Hartford, on a promissory note for $110, dated April 12, 1879, due in seven months after date, with interest from date until paid, at the rate of ten per cent, per annum. Trial at "the November Term, 1880, of the district court, and judgment for the defendant. The plaintiffs bring the case here. The opinion states the facts.
1Opinion of the Court
*250The opinion of the court was delivered by
Valentine, J.:.
This was an action brought by the firm of Latham & Ireland against Henry Hartford, on a promissory note. The defendant set up two defenses: First, that the note was given for a horse, or rather a mare, on a warranty of soundness, and that the animal was unsound and soon died; and second, as follows: “For further defense defendant says, that although the said animal hereinbefore referred to was worthless, for the reasons stated in the first paragraph of this answer, still, as he had used the animal some before it died, in order to avoid…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Boothby v. ScalesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Rogers v. Hanson & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1872
- Bigger v. BovardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
- Shaw v. SearsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1865
3Cited by9 opinions
- Frick v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1898
- Wilcox & White Organ Co. v. LasleySupreme Court of Kansas · 1889
- Kuhns v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul R'y Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Fisk v. BullardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1951
- Elderkin v. FellowsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.