McCormick v. Kelly
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiffs from an order of the district court for Brown county, Cox, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
This action was brought to recover the amount of a promissory note made by the defendant to the plaintiffs, for part of the purchase price of a harvester purchased by the former from the latter. The making of the note is not in issue; the only defence asserted being in the nature of a counterclaim for damages from an alleged breach of warranty, on the part of the plaintiffs, in respect to. the harvester.
By his answer the defendant avers that he first took the machine on trial, and that, upon trial, it proved to be unsatisfactory and would *136not do good work, and that he notified the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Schuchardt v. AllensSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Boothby v. ScalesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Blythe v. SpeaksTexas Supreme Court · 1859
- Smith v. . TracyNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Ahern v. . GoodspeedNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- M. H. Walker Realty Co. v. American Surety Co. of New YorkUtah Supreme Court · 1922
- Marshall v. GilmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Feldmeyer v. WerntzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1913
- Gaar, Scott & Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- International Harvester Co. v. LawyerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.