Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp. v. Moushon
| Citation | 93 Ill.App.2d 280,235 N.E.2d 263 |
| Decision Date | 25 March 1968 |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 10898 |
| Parties | , 5 UCC Rep.Serv. 363 OLIN MATHIESON CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Plaintiff- Counterdefendant-Appellee, v. Lyle B. MOUSHON, Defendant-Counter-plaintiff-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Robert Mehrhoff, Carrollton, for appellant.
Denby & Dobbs, Carlinville, Stuart Dobbs, Carlinville, of counsel, for appellee.
This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover the balance of an account for explosives sold to the defendant, which account was not contested and judgment was entered thereon against defendant in the amount of $800. Defendant counterclaimed for $10,000 damages alleging improper use or negligence on the part of plaintiff's agents in the furnishing and use of the explosives.
Defendant operated a rock quarry. Plaintiff's agents sold him explosives and prepared and set off a shot. The shot did not break up the rock to the desired extent and defendant was unable to handle most of the rock in his rock crusher. His counterclaim for damages was based on three theories of liability, express warranty, res ipsa negligence and implied warranty. At the trial by the court without a jury, the charges of express warranty and res ipsa negligence were dismissed on motion at the conclusion of counterclaimant's evidence. The case proceeded on the charge of implied warranty and resulted in a finding against counterclaimant. On this appeal counterclaimant alleges error in both of these rulings.
The evidence showed that plaintiff's agents told defendant that their explosive was of good quality, that good results would be obtained and he would be pleased with the breakage and the whole operation. The trial court held these to be statements of the seller's opinion or sales talk rather than matters of express warranty. We agree with this finding. Ill.Rev.Stat.1959, ch. 121 1/2, § 12 (now ch. 26, § 2-313).
It was in evidence that the shot holes were drilled for defendant by another quarry operator. Also, there was a toe, or ledge of rock, extending from the base of the formation. All agreed this toe needed to be and was shot first. The broken rock from the toe was not removed from the main shot and the effect of this rock in the quarry was in dispute. Since these matters were not within the control of counterdefendant res ipsa cannot apply. The quarry was near some high tension power lines and some homes. Because of the possibility of damage to this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nationwide Agribusiness Ins. Co. v. Sma Elevator Constr. Inc.
... ... unmeritorious claims [or defenses].” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 585, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 ... Compare, e.g., [816 F.Supp.2d 680] Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp. v. Moushon, 93 Ill.App.2d 280, ... ...
-
Royal Business Machines, Inc. v. Lorraine Corp.
...Farms, Inc. v. Corno Feed Products, --- Ind.App. ----, 366 N.E.2d 3 (1977), or are "of good quality," Olin-Mathieson Chemical Corp. v. Moushon, 93 Ill.App.2d 280, 235 N.E.2d 263 (1968), or will "last a lifetime" and be "in perfect condition," Performance Motors, Inc. v. Allen, 280 N.C. 385,......
-
Thursby v. Reynolds Metals Co.
...being injured by the machine was an opinion; the fact affirmed was not one of which buyer was unaware); Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp. v. Moushon, 93 Ill.App.2d 280, 235 N.E.2d 263 (1968) (seller's statements that explosives were of "good quality," would produce "good results," and customer ......
-
Nationwide Agribusiness Ins. Co. v. SMA Elevator Constr. Inc., C 09-4002-MWB
...express warranty could be based, from mere statements of opinion or praise. Compare, e.g., Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp. v. Moushon, 93 Ill. App. 2d 280, 235 N.E.2d 263 (1968) (holding that seller's statements that explosives were of "good quality," would produce "good results," and that cu......