Mitchell v. Pinckney
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeals from WinneshieTc District Coiurt.— HoN. 0. H. Kelly, Judge. These appeals axe submitted on the same abstracts and arguments, and will be disposed of in one opinion. They are each actions at law to recover damages for false representations, and breach of warranty in the sale of some cows, and for selling to plaintiffs animals which were diseased. Defendant Edwin Pinckney denied any connection with the alleged sale.
Read the full summary
Appeals from WinneshieTc District Coiurt.— HoN. 0. H. Kelly, Judge. These appeals axe submitted on the same abstracts and arguments, and will be disposed of in one opinion. They are each actions at law to recover damages for false representations, and breach of warranty in the sale of some cows, and for selling to plaintiffs animals which were diseased. Defendant Edwin Pinckney denied any connection with the alleged sale. He further pleaded that the defendant James Pinckney sold the cows to plaintiffs, and that he (Edwin) had no connection therewith. Defendant James Pinckney admitted the sale…
1Opinion of the CourtDeemee, J.
Save one, the questions raised are common to each appeal. That one we shall consider in a separate branch of this opinion.
In May and June of the year 1902, plaintiffs purchased of one or both of the defendants twenty-one head of cows. The negqtiations were conducted with the defendant James Pinckney; his son, the defendant Edwin, being at that time in Europe.' .It is claimed, however, that Edwin was a joint owner of the property, and is liable with his father, James. This presents one of the principal issues of fact in the appeal of Edwin Pinckney. ' Plaintiffs claim that James Pinckney *698orally…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Joy v. BitzerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- Powell v. ChittickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- J. I. Case Threshing-Machine Co. v. McKinnonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Tewkesbury v. BennettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Stevens v. Bradley & SonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Dailey v. Holiday Distributing CorporationSupreme Court of Iowa · 1967
- Worley v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1952
- Drager v. Carlson Hybrid Corn Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1952
- Ambrose v. HackertSupreme Court of Iowa · 1950
- Woolsey v. ZieglarSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.