Fitzgerald v. Evans
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant, Owen J. Evans, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin county, Canty, J., made August 25, 1891, refusing a new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant, Owen J. Evans, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin county, Canty, J., made August 25, 1891, refusing a new trial. Plaintiff, William Fitzgerald, on February 20, 1890, bought of defendant a stallion for $1,000. Defendant warranted the animal in writing, as follows: “I, O. J. Evans, do warrant and guarantee said colt to be sound in every particular, and a fairly sure foal getter, and that the small puff on the inside left hock joint will all disappear entirely, and he is standard bred and eligible to registration in Wallace’s stud book.” This action was to…
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
This is an action for breach of warranty in the sale of a stallion. The blemish or defect complained of by plaintiff, and which proved to be a spavin, was obvious and visible in the hock or joint of the animal, but was of such a character that it was uncertain in the mind of the plaintiff whether it would be permanent or harmful, and there was a special warranty in the contract covering the particular defect. A purchaser may undoubtedly protect himself against a specified defect, though visible, by a special warranty.. It is a matter of contract, which it is competent for parties to enter…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Seale v. SchultzCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
- Hansen v. Gaar, Scott & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- O'CONNELL v. KennedyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
- Norris v. ParkerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1896