McDonald Manufacturing Co. v. Thomas
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Franklin Oi/reuit Cowrt. Action by plaintiff as a corporation, upon two promissory notes given for- a threshing machine. The notes were executed to a corporation known as the Fond du Lac Threshing Machine Co., and sold by that company to the plaintiff for value before maturity.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Franklin Oi/reuit Cowrt. Action by plaintiff as a corporation, upon two promissory notes given for- a threshing machine. The notes were executed to a corporation known as the Fond du Lac Threshing Machine Co., and sold by that company to the plaintiff for value before maturity. The defendant, for answer, avers that the machine for which the notes were given was sold 'to him by the Fond du Lac Threshing Machine Co., with a warranty; that it was wholly worthless, all of which was known to the plaintiff at the time it purchased the notes. There was a trial by jury, and verdict and…
1Opinion of the Court
Adams, Cn. J.
i. pbomisfaamepl cónnotice. ‘ I. The defendant, at the time he purchased the machine, made a cash payment. The evidence showed that the machine was defective and not xvorth more than the amount paid. Whether the plaintiff, at the time of its purchase, knew it was defective, is one of the pi-incipal questions in the case. To show that the plaintiff did know it, the defendant introduced as a witness one McDonald, who was president and stockholder of the Fond du Lac Threshing Machine Co. from its organization until the sale to plaintiff of the notes in question, and was at the time…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tewkesbury v. BennettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
3Cited by10 opinions
- Richardson v. CoffmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Jackson & Sons v. MottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Figge v. HillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
- Larson v. CalderNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1907
- Brackett v. MartensCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.