Carley v. Wilkins
New York Supreme Court
This action was commenced under the code of 1848. The complaint stated that the plaintiff, by his agent, on the 16th of June, 1847, purchased and received of the defendant 218 barrels of flour in closed barrels, iohich the defendant sold and delivered to the plaintiff as superfine flour, Michigan mills, at $7,50 per barrel, which price was paid therefor by the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This action was commenced under the code of 1848. The complaint stated that the plaintiff, by his agent, on the 16th of June, 1847, purchased and received of the defendant 218 barrels of flour in closed barrels, iohich the defendant sold and delivered to the plaintiff as superfine flour, Michigan mills, at $7,50 per barrel, which price was paid therefor by the plaintiff. That instead of such flour being superfine flour, the most of it proved, on subsequent examination, to be of an inferior quality to superfine flour, in consequence of which inferiority the plaintiff sustained damages of at…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Willard, J.
The referee has found that the flour in question was purchased by the plaintiff, without having been examined or seen by ‘him; that it was purchased for superfine flour, Michigan mills, upon the representation of the defendant that it was in quality superfine, or extra superfine, and worth a shilling a barrel more than common. The testimony fully warrants the referee in so finding; and it was received without objection. The representation made by the defendant to Miller, the plaintiff’s agent, was a warranty of the quality of the flour, within the decision in Chapman…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Seixas v. WoodsNew York Supreme Court · 1804
- Swett v. ColgateNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Chapman v. MurchNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Welsh v. CarterNew York Supreme Court · 1828
3Cited by12 opinions
- Crislip v. CainWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1882
- K v. HWisconsin Supreme Court · 1866
- Robbins v. DeverillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
- Bartlett v. . HoppockNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Hughes v. Funston & SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.