Satanta State Bank v. O. B. McClintock Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Loring, Justice.
This is an action to recover the purchase price of a burglar alarm system purchased by plaintiff of defendant. Plaintiff has appealed from an order denying its motion for new trial.
April 4, 1931, plaintiff entered into a contract with defendant for the purchase of a burglar alarm system to be installed by defendant in plaintiff’s bank building at Satanta, Kansas. Among other provisions of the contract the defendant covenanted:
“The O. B. McClintock Company agrees to, and does hereby guarantee the full and complete operation of the System described iu this order, subject to the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Satter v. TurnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Vasatka v. MatschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Brown v. BertrandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
- Kruchowski v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Olson v. HeiseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.