Sherrod v. Langdon
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Wapello District Court. PLAiNTnrFS seek to recover damages resulting, as they allege, from the purchase by them of defendants, of a certain lot of sheep. In one count it is alleged that the sheep were warranted sound, in the other that they were represented to be free from any disease, and especially such as “ foot-rot” and “ scab” — that this was false, &c. . Upon issue joined, there was a trial; verdict for plaintiff, judgment thereon, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
i. fraud: measure of damages. No part of the testimony is before us, and what the facts were, therefore, we have no means of knowing. The'errors assigned relate to the , „ _ , - instructions given by the court, and raise ior our consideration these questions:
I. Plaintiffs had, at the time of purchasing these sheep, other sheep, and these, as they claim, became diseased and died because of the “ foot-rot ” and “ scab ” imparted to them by the unsound sheep,so sold to them by defendants, without fault, &c. The injury to these sheep so owned prior to this purchase, under • the instructions,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jeffrey v. BigelowNew York Supreme Court · 1835
- Rathbun & West v. PayneNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Barnum v. VandusenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1844
3Cited by13 opinions
- Jones v. GeorgeTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Dushane v. BenedictSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Hobbs v. SmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Thompson v. First Nat. Bank of ToledoSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Uhl v. HarveyIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.