Bancroft v. San Francisco Tool Co.

Citations

• 120 Cal. 228
• 52 P. 496
• 1898 Cal. LEXIS 740

Syllabus

<p>Contract to Erect Elevator—Construction of Warranty — First Class Workmanship.—An express warranty in a contract for the erection of an elevator, which included full specifications as to the manner of the erection, and as to the material to be used, by the terms of which the work' mentioned in the contract was to be furnished “in a first-class, workmanlike manner,” refers only to the work in the erection of the elevator under the specifications made in the contract, and cannot, by any reasonable construction, be held to warrant that the plan or design of the elevator, or the specifications made in the contract, were first class, or that the elevator was suitable for the purposes intended.</p> <p>Id.—Insufficient Size of Drum Specified.—The fact that the size of the drum specified in the contract proved to be insufficient, and that damage resulted therefrom, is immaterial, as respects an express warranty merely to furnish the work mentioned in the contract in a first class workmanlike manner.</p> <p>Id.—Implied Warranty as to Fitness—Specifications in Contract—Construction of Code—Assumption of Risk by Purchaser.—Section 1770 of the Civil Code, providing that “one who manufactures an article under an order for a particular purpose, warrants by the sale that it is reasonably fit for that purpose,” does not apply where the manufactured article is furnished under a contract demanding that it be made according to specifications, and the contract is literally performed; but, in such case, the purchaser selects the article, and obtains what he orders, and, in the absence of an express warranty, assumes the risk following the purchase.</p>