Warder, Bushnell & Glessner Co. v. Horne Bros.
Supreme Court of Iowa
'Appeal from Linn District Gourt. — Hon. Widdiam G. Thompson, Judge. Action for the purchase price of a self-binder. The defense was. that the machine' was returned in strict compliance with the terms of the contract. The trial resulted in a judgment against the plaintiff for costs, from which it appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtLadd, J.
1 As the defendants relied on compliance with the terms of the warranty, that part of the order given by them may be set out: “This machine is warranted to be well made, of good material, and durable with proper care. If upon one day’s trial the machine should not work well, the purchaser, shall give immediate notice to said Warder, Bushnell & Glessner Co., or their agent, and allow time to send a person to put it in order. If it cannot then be made to work well, the purchaser shall return it at once to the agents of whom he received it, and all cash and notes received in settlement will be…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Scammon v. Germania InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. BrowerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Richardson v. EndWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. RussellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892
3Cited by6 opinions
- First National Bank v. DutcherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Georgia Agricultural Works v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Oil-Well Supply Co. v. WatsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
- National Live Stock Insurance v. BartlowIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
- Morrison v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.