Henshaw v. Robins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit on an alleged warranty by the defendant, upon a sale of indigo by him to the plaintiffs. The declaration also contained a count for money had and received.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on an alleged warranty by the defendant, upon a sale of indigo by him to the plaintiffs. The declaration also contained a count for money had and received. At the trial in the court of common pleas, before Warren, J. it was agreed that the defendant, on and before the 9th of August 1843, was an auctioneer in Boston, doing business under the name of Thomas W. Sears & Co.; that for some days previous to said 9th of August, he had advertised for sale by public auction, at his store, on that day, sundry articles of merchandize, and, among others, “ two cases of Manilla indigo, of…
1Opinion of the CourtWilde, J.
Upon the exceptions to the instructions given by the court of common pleas, several questions have been discussed by counsel, two only of which we deem material in the decision of the case. The first question is, whether when a bill of parcels is given, upon a sale of goods, describing the goods sold, or designating them by a name well understood, such a bill is to be considered as a warranty that the goods sold are what they are described or designated to be in the bill. The second question is, whether, if such a bill of parcels is generally to be so considered, the rule applies to cases…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Borrekins v. Bevan & PorterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1831
- Seixas v. WoodsNew York Supreme Court · 1804
- Bradford v. ManlyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Swett v. ColgateNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Chapman v. MurchNew York Supreme Court · 1822
3Cited by3 opinions
- Larson v. CalderNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1907
- Brock v. Newmark Grain Co., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1923
- Luger Furniture Co. v. StreetSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897