Wohlschlegel v. Holst
| Decision Date | 19 November 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 8781,8781 |
| Citation | 81 Idaho 470,346 P.2d 1051 |
| Parties | A. L. WOHLSCHLEGEL, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. James E. 'Ted' HOLST, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
A. A. Merrill, Idaho Falls, for appellant.
Eugene L. Bush, George L. Barnard, Idaho Falls, for respondent.
This is an action for damages for breach of contract. Plaintiff-respondent seeks to recover the purchase price of a pipeline milking machine installed on defendant-appellant's dairy farm.
The appellant telephoned respondent during the latter part of August, 1958. He informed respondent he wished to install a new milkline--a device by which milk is taken from dairy cows by mechanical means and conducted to containers without intervention of human hands. The parties disagree as to what was said in this telephone conversation. The appellant maintains he specified 'a Chore Boy milker and the best that money can buy, the latest type.' Respondent contends the Chore Boy brand of milker was not mentioned, and that appellant did emphasize he wanted the best milkline money could buy.
Respondent drove to appellant's farm the following day. There is again conflict as to whether the Chore Boy brand was mentioned. After some conversation, the appellant signed the following purchase order, prepared by respondent:
"A. L. Wohlschlegel
"P. O. Box 286--
"Idaho Falls, Idaho
Sold to Ted Holst 8/22/58
----------------------------------------------------------------
Address Merrill Farm, Ucon, Ida
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ship To
----------------------------------------------------------------
Address
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ship When Terms Order No
Via
Salesman
----------------------------------------------------------------
1- Complete recirculatory pipe line with Nor-Cal Releasor and dump tank
40 Foot 1 1/2" §§ steel pipe
S. S. Clamp on Ells and Fittings on milk line. Neoprene Coupling Elb. on
wash line side. S. S. Moisture Trap and Vac. Valve
4 Unit SS Manifold. Three complete milk units. All hose and Test lids
for Unit milker Pulsator (master) and all Hangers complete for milking
necessary $1388.10
1 vaccum supplier 6 unit with 1 HP. motor 300.00
---------
$1688.10
Trade in Condee Supplier and 2 buckets 200.00
---------
$1488.10
Terms--Cash on satisfactory operation completion. 1 yr service guarantee
Purchased By /s/ James E. Holst "
------------------------------------------------------
A milkline was thereafter installed. It consisted of trade-name parts from Nor-Cal and Chore Boy machines, a Zero brand strainer, a Garst pump, and Cornish glassware, together with other component parts.
Appellant tried out the machine, but after one milking he went back to using his old equipment. Appellant maintains the milkline did not operate properly; respondent said it needed only a few adjustments. Thereafter, appellant asked respondent to take the machine back, and the latter refused. Appellant later dismantled and returned the machine. He paid no part of the purchase price.
Respondent brought this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rogers v. Hendrix
...Ranch, Inc. v. Grasmick, 91 Idaho 6, 415 P.2d 48 (1966); Boesiger v. DeModena, 88 Idaho 337, 399 P.2d 635 (1965); Wohlschlegel v. Holst, 81 Idaho 470, 346 P.2d 1051 (1959); Stone v. Bradshaw, 64 Idaho 152, 128 P.2d 844 (1942); Molyneux v. Twin Falls Canal Co., 54 Idaho 619, 35 P.2d 651, 94 ......
-
Transamerica Leasing Corp. v. Van's Realty Co.
...in order to enforce properly the parties' true agreement. Rudeen v. Howell, 76 Idaho 365, 283 P.2d 587 (1955); cf. Wohlschlegel v. Holst, 81 Idaho 470, 346 P.2d 1051 (1959). The judgment is affirmed. Costs to TAYLOR, C. J., SMITH and McFADDEN, JJ., and DUNLAP, District Judge, concur. 1 Van ......
-
Kilbourne-Park Corp. v. Buckingham
...See Yellowstone Sheep Co. v. Diamond Dot Live Stock Co., 43 Wyo. 15, 25-27, 297 P. 1107, 1110-1111, 75 A.L.R. 1151; Wohlschlegel v. Holst, 81 Idaho 470, 346 P.2d 1051; Nabors Oil Corporation v. Samuels, 175 La. 371, 143 So. 330; Weiss v. Gross, 165 A. 90, 11 N.J.Mise. 41; Earle v. Illinois ......
-
Boesiger v. DeModena
...v. Snyder, 65 Idaho 678, 151 P.2d 776; Molyneux v. Twin Falls Canal Co., 54 Idaho 619, 35 P.2d 651, 94 A.L.R. 1264; Wohlschlegel v. Holst, 81 Idaho 470, 346 P.2d 1051; Wood River Power Co. v. Arkoosh, 37 Idaho 348, 215 P. It is noted that the real property which, in addition to said three l......