Wilkin Mfg. Co. v. H.M. Loud & Sons Lumber Co.
Decision Date | 22 December 1892 |
Parties | WILKIN MANUF'G CO. v. H. M. LOUD & SONS LUMBER CO. |
Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Error to circuit court, Iosco county; WILLIAM H. SIMPSON, Judge.
Action by the Wilkin Manufacturing Company against the H. M. Loud & Sons Lumber Company to recover money. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Main J. Connine, for appellant.
O E. MCutcheon, (Forrest & MCutcheon, of counsel,) for appellee.
Plaintiff brought suit for the claimed balance due it from the defendant for certain mill machinery, amounting to $1,944.38. On the trial plaintiff had verdict and judgment for an amount considerably less than the amount claimed. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff, to make its case, on the trial produced the items of machinery furnished, and proved their value, as well as an admission of the defendant as to the indebtedness. The defendant, with its plea of the general issue, gave notice that the machinery was purchased under a special contract, by the terms of which the plaintiff was to manufacture and deliver to defendant two band sawmills complete with all appliances, etc., connected therewith, and to be the best made; that plaintiff was to furnish a competent man to set them up, and warranted them to be well built, according to the latest improvements, and that they would cut first-class lumber in a first-class manner to the amount of 100,000 feet per day of 20 hours; that plaintiff failed and neglected to send an experienced man to set the mills up, and that they were so unskillfully put up that they cut poor lumber, and would not cut 100,000 feet per day, did not run properly, but broke, thereby causing great delay and expense; also that the plaintiff did not send the said mills and machinery within the time agreed upon and fixed for the delivery, to the damage of defendant, which it would recoup on the trial. Defendant introduced in evidence what it claimed to be the contract of warranty. This contract, if any was made, consists of certain letters and telegrams passing between the parties, as follows:
On the margin is written, "Changed to conform to our letter."
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Anderson v. Stewart
... ... Holt, 56 Wis. 100, 14 N.W ... 8; Wilkin Mfg. Co. v. H. M. Loud & Sons L. Co., 94 Mich ... ...
-
Phelps v. Good
... ... 477; Egger v. Nesbit, supra; Wilkins Mfg. Co. v ... Loud, 94 Mich. 158, 53 N.W. 1045.) ... appellants the offeree. (Wilkin v. Loud, 94 Mich ... 158, 53 N.W. 1045; Baker ... ...
-
Beiseker v. Amberson
... ... Clark v. Burr, 55 N.W. 401; Russel v. Falls Mfg ... Co., 82 N.W. 134 ... Holt, 56 Wis. 100, 14 N.W. 8; ... Wilkin Mfg. Co. v. H. M. Loud & Sons L. Co., 94 ... ...
-
Couch v. McCoy
... ... 109, 32 L.Ed. 500; ... Dalzell v. Dueber Mfg. Co., 149 U.S. 315, 13 Sup.Ct ... [138 F ... 736, 8 S.E. 743, 3 L.R.A ... 94; Wilkin Mfg. Co. v. Lumber Co. (Mich.) 53 N.W ... ...