Durbin v. Denham
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBbown, J.
The promissory note, the basis of this action, was given by one farmer to another as a part of the purchase price of a second-hand tractor. The action was defended upon the ground that the warranty of the tractor was breached, and the defendant set up a counterclaim for damages by reason thereof.'
The most serious question in the case involves the instruction of the court set forth in the statement.
It is a well-established rule of law that there is no implied warranty as to quality in the sale of second-hand machinery.
“In the sale of second-hand chattels, there is ordinarily no implied…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Kellogg Bridge Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- McDonough v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Park v. Richardson & Boynton Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Gilmore v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Taylor v. ColeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Drumar Mining Co. v. Morris Ravine Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
- Foster v. Agri-Chem, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1963
- J. L. Latture Equipment Co. v. Gruendler Patent Crusher & Pulverizer Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1930
- Klinge v. FarrisOregon Supreme Court · 1928
- Koch v. RiceOregon Supreme Court · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.