[References are to Sections.] Wooten v. Wilmington & W. R. Co. | Yale Gas-Stove Co. v. Wilcox (64 (128 N. C. 119), 2071. Conn. 101), 2074. Worcester v. Great Falls Mfg. Co. (41 Yampert v. Johnson ([Ark.] 15 S. W. Worden v. Philadelphia (167 Pa. St. Yates v. Root (4 App. Div. [N. Y.] 523), 2185. 439), 2018. Worley v. Hineman (6 Ind. App. Yazoo & Miss. V. R. Co. v. Lambuth 240), 1833, 1834. (74 Miss. 758), 2034. Worman v. Worman (L. R. 43 Ch. Yeomans v. Bell (151 N. Y. 230), Yoakum v. Dunn (1 Tex. C. A. 524), 1964, 1965, 1966. Yokom v. McBride (56 Iowa, 139), 1734, 1743. Yokum v. Thomas (15 Iowa, 67), 1834. Wrenn v. Truitt (116 Ga. 708), 2215. Wright v. Everett ([Iowa] 55 N. W. 4), 1860. Wright v. Falkner (37 Ala. 274), Yorks v. Mooberg (84 Minn. 502), 2019. 2171. Wright v. Jennings (1 Bailey [S. C.], | Young v. Gower (88 Ill. App. 70), 277, 281), 1811, 2181. 1800. Wright v. Jones (14 Tex. Civ. App. Young v. Harrison (17 Ga. 30), 1793. 423), 2102. Young v. Hurd (1 N. Y. Supp. 819), 2146. Wright v. Nipple (92 Ind. 310), 1808, 1836. Wright v. Roach (57 Me. 600), 2222. Wurtz v. Morrison (17 Tex. 372), 1688. Young v. Muhling (48 App. Div. [N. Young v. Stone (4 Watts & S. [Pa.] Wyandot Club v. Sells (6 Ohio N. P. Zabriskie v. Bandendistel ([N. J. Ch. 64), 2144. Wyche v. Ross (119 N. C. 174), 1836. Wyckoff v. Horan (39 Minn. 429), 1721. 1890] 20 Atl. 163), 1814. Wylie v. Ohio River &c. R. Co.(48 Zeigle v. Wells (23 Cal. 179), 1970. S. C. 405), 1905. Wylly v. Quigley (11 S. D. 491), 1911. Zender v. Seliger-Toothill Co. (16 Wyman v. Ballard (12 Mass. 304), Zent v. Picken (54 Iowa, 535), 1801. 1797, 1801, 1803, 1812. Zerfing v. Suling (14 S. D. 303), 1801. Wyman v. Brigden (4 Mass. 150), Zimmele v. American P. B. Co. (1 1827. App. Div. [N. Y.] 327), 2040. Wyman v. Leavitt (71 Me. 227), Zimmerman v. Heil (86 Hun [N. Y.], 2120. 114), 2042. Wynn v. Longley (61 Ill. App. 616), Zinn v. New Jersey Steamboat Co. 1686. (49 N. Y. 442), 1957. Yager v. Kentucky Title Co. (22 Ky. Zuller v. Rogers (7 Hun [N. Y.], 540), L. Rep. 2240), 2110. 1694. CHAPTER LX. SALES OF PERSONALTY WARRANTY, FALSE REPRESENTATIONS, ETC. § 1683. Sales-Warranty, false representations, etc.-Liability-Generally. 1684. Same subject continued. 1685. Sales-Warranty, false representations, etc. Generally. 1686. Rules as to measure of dam- 1687. Same subject continued— 1690. Actual loss or injury as dam- 1691. Purchase price as damages. 1692. Purchase price-Defenses and estoppel. 1693. Consequential, remote, uncertain and nominal dam ages. 1694. Special damages-Expenses, etc.-Factors in computation of damages. 1695. Same subject continuedFactors not in computation of damages. 1696. Rescission of contract. 1697. Refusal to accept. 1698. Breach of warranty as to one of the items of property sold. 1699. Resale Sale at auction-Interest. 1700. Warranty against hidden defects-Inspection. 1701. Warranty of personal property against encumbrances. 1702. Merchantable character. 1703. Warranty of title-Vindictive damages. 1704. Articles manufactured or to be used in manufactureOr for particular work. 1705. Sales of shares of stockBonds. 1706. Same subject continued. 1707. Sale of seeds, bulbs, trees, etc. 1708. Sale of animals-Warranty, false representations, etc. -Generally. 1709. Same subject-Rules as to measure of damages. 1710. Sale of animals-WarrantyDamages expressly stipulated. 1711. Conditional sale of horseBreach of warranty. 1712. Fraudulent representation in exchanging cattle. 1713. Sale of animals -Warranty, etc., as to registry. 1714. Sale of animals for breeding or particular purpose. 1715. Sale of animals-Warranty, etc.- Character, quality, age, title, etc. 1716. Sale of machinery - Warranty, etc.-Generally. § 1683. Warranty, false representations, etc.-Liability -Generally. Where cartridges, different from those which. are asked for, but similar in appearance, are negligently sold, the seller is liable to the purchaser for damages caused by a premature explosion of the said cartridges while he was properly using them.1 And the manufacturer of umbrella covers is liable for an injury to umbrellas from the color coming off upon them where he sold them under a warranty that the color would not come off. So where one knows that a folding bed is dangerous, but represents that it is safe for use, he is liable for injuries caused by the defects therein, to any person who uses it, although there may be no privity of contract between them.3 And where goods which have been fraudulently ordered by an individual in the name of a fictitious person or firm, and have been shipped in compliance with the order, directed to such person or firm, are delivered by the carrier to a stranger, without requiring evidence of his identity, the carrier is liable to the consignor for their value. In another case plaintiffs were induced, by representations of one Collins, to send goods addressed to "J. F. Roberts, Roxbury, Mass." The goods were sent over defendant's line. Collins then went to Boston and claimed and received the goods of defendant, under the name of "J. F. Roberts," which name he had assumed for the purpose 1 Smith v. Clarke Hardware Co., 100 Ga. 163; 39 L. R. A. 607; 28 S. E. 73. 2 Jones v. Mayer (Sup. Ct. App. Term.), 16 Misc. 586; 38 N. Y. Supp. 801. 8 Lewis v. Terry, 111 Cal. 39; 31 L. R. A. 220; 43 Pac. 398. 4 Price v. Oswego & Syracuse Ry. Co., 50 N, Y, 213. of getting the goods. There was no such person as “J. F. Roberts" and no person who was known or passed by that name. It was decided that the defendant was liable to the plaintiff for the value of the goods. § 1684. Same subject continued.-A vendor cannot avoid liability for damages to the personal property of the purchaser by the overflow of a stream skirting the land, because of his fraudulent representation that the stream never overflowed its banks, on the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in leaving the property where the water could reach it, it appearing that the plaintiff in so doing relied upon the vendor's representations. Nor can a buyer of a machine avoid liability for the purchase price under a provision that if the machine does not fill the warranty the seller will send a competent person and remedy the defect, where the failure of the machine to work properly was due to the buyer's want of care and skill. Nor is a purchaser of goods estopped to claim damages for failure to furnish the goods as agreed, by simply giving a subsequent order for other goods. Again, the vendor is not liable for breach of any warranties not found in the written contract. Nor is a waterworks company responsible as an implied warrantor of the purity of the water distributed by it for public and domestic use, where it is operating under a franchise from and contract with a municipal corporation.10 And where a milk dealer purchased milk from a wholesale dealer under an agreement that it should be pure and wholesome, he cannot recover damages in an action based on the theory of contract against the seller where the milk inspector caused the purchaser's arrest for selling adulterated milk, of which offense he was convicted and fined, since the damages are consequential and only recoverable in tort." Nor does a guaranty that skimmed 5 Winslow v. Vermont, etc., R. R. | Ranch Co. (C. C. App. 8th C.), 36 U. Co., 42 Vt. 700; contra, 110 Mass. 26. S. App. 634; 73 Fed. 994; 20 C. C. 6 Oakes v. Miller, 11 Colo. App. A. 244. 374; 55 Pac. 193. 10 Green v. Ashland Water Co., 77 7 Burke v. Keystone Mfg. Co., 19 N. W. 722; 101 Wis. 258; 43 L. R. A. Ind. App. 556; 48 N. E. 382. 8 Blumenthal v. Stahle, 98 Iowa, 722; 68 N. W. 447. 9 Wilson v. United States Cattle 109 117; 5 Am. Neg. Rep. 265. 11 Leck v. Rudd (Sup. Ct. Trial Term), 53 N, Y. Supp. 208. 1729 |