Legal Opinion

Dunn v. Vaughan

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 5, 1926No. 17022PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

MAXEV, C.

This is-ah action on a- promissory note for $600 given as part pasunent on a tractor. The execution of the note is admitted, but the defendant sets up as a defense that Ihe tractor was defective, and finally blew up, and defendant was unable to use it afterwards. Defendant also filed a cross-petition, wherein he sought to recover back the money he had paid. The testimony shows that E. O. Dunn bought this tractor from James D. Vaughan; that Vaughan had been demonstrating with the tractor in the neighborhood for something like a year, and that the price of it was $1,385, but…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Woolsey v. ZieglarSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. Frey v. FailesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  3. International Harvester Co. v. LawyerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Standard Sewing MacH. Co. v. New State Shirt & Overall Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Mercantile Trust Co. v. RolandSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
  2. Pauls Valley Milling Co. v. GabbertSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  3. Luke v. PattersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1946
  4. Abbott v. PeppersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API