Bialy v. Krause
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Bay; Shepard, J. Assumpsit by Robert 0. Bialy against Ernest Krause for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Plaintiff is a dealer in hardware and agricultural implements in Bay City; defendant, a farmer, living a few miles distant. Plaintiff had an agent named Laetz, who went among the farmers soliciting orders, among whom was the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to Bay; Shepard, J. Assumpsit by Robert 0. Bialy against Ernest Krause for goods sold and delivered. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Plaintiff is a dealer in hardware and agricultural implements in Bay City; defendant, a farmer, living a few miles distant. Plaintiff had an agent named Laetz, who went among the farmers soliciting orders, among whom was the defendant. Mr. Laetz had a catalogue, in which was a cut or picture of an implement known as “ No. 75 Iron Age Cultivator.” Plaintiff did not keep these cultivators in stock, and had never dealt in them,…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). 1. In the first part of his instruction the court instructed the jury:
“ If that machine was sold to the defendant to be satisfactory, if that machine was sold to defendant and guaranteed to be satisfactory to him, the-plaintiff would have to show that the defendant was satisfied with the machine, and it leaves the entire control and determination of the whole matter with the defendant. The plaintiff would have no standing at all, unless the defendant would determine that the machine was just what he wanted and all he wanted and perfectly satisfactory in every way,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bronson v. HerbertMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by1 opinion
- Moody v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1917