Richmond v. Greeley
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Chiclcasaw District Cov/rt. Tuts action is brought to recover of the defendant an alleged balance due on a “ Bran Duster,” sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Chiclcasaw District Cov/rt. Tuts action is brought to recover of the defendant an alleged balance due on a “ Bran Duster,” sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. The defendant sets up that he purchased the machine under a printed warranty which was broken; also that plaintiff, by his agent, undertook to make said machine work well, or that he would pay all damages defendant might sustain by reason of failure; that he failed to make the machine work well, and claims damages for expenses incurred in trying to make it work well; also, because his mill had to stand idle…
1Opinion of the Court
Miller, Ch. J.
— The printed warrant accompanying the machine at the time of the sale thereof to the defendant, was as follows:
“ GwndMions of Warranty. — The proprietor will deliver, in good conditions for shipping, this machine, directed to responsible parties. The parties ordering to pay all freight and expenses of putting the machine in operation, according to the directions sent with the machine. If the machine does not give satisfaction, the proprietor or his agent must be notified immediately, that he may give it his personal attention. If they fail to make it operate satisfactorily, no…
2Cited by5 opinions
- J. W. Edgerly & Co. v. CoverSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Gates Iron Works v. Denver Engineering Works Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1902
- Cedar Rapids Fuel Co. v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Kinkead v. HartleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Gates Iron Works v. Denver Engineering Works Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1902