Legal Opinion

Buob v. Feenaughty MacHinery Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1937No. 26558. Department TwoPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeals, J.

— Defendant, Feenaughty Machinery Company, is a foreign corporation, dealing in farm machinery, authorized to do business within the state of Washington. Plaintiff instituted this action for the purpose of recovering damages sustained by reason of his purchase from defendant of a tractor, at a price of nearly four thousand dollars, which plaintiff in his complaint alleged was seriously defective, and which plaintiff was induced to purchase from defendant by representations made by defendant’s officers and agents, which plaintiff alleges were false and made with fraudulent intent to deceive…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Kromer v. . HeimNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
  2. McDaniel v. Mallary Bros. Machinery Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
  3. Goodrich v. StanleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1856
  4. Frankfurt-Barnett Co. v. William Prym Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
  5. Bonded Adjustment Co. v. AndersonWashington Supreme Court · 1936

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Lawson v. HelmichWashington Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Lobdell v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  4. Buob v. Feenaughty MacHinery Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1940
  5. United Forest Products Co. v. BaxterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1971

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API