Herron & Holland v. Dibrell Bros.
Citations
- 87 Va. 289
- 12 S.E. 674
- 1891 Va. LEXIS 69
Syllabus
<p>1. Sale—Warranty—Evidence.—The jury is justifiable in finding that tobacco was warranted by seller by evidence that seller represented to buyer that “ it was sound ” and “ redried,” and “ would certainly keep.”</p> <p>2. Idem—Case at bar.—D. purchased of H. & H. twenty one hogsheads of tobacco, seventeen of which proved unsound. Evidence to prove that two other hogsheads from the same lot were sound: held, inadmissible.</p> <p>3. Idem—Instructions.—Instruction that if the jury find that the tobaccos were falsely represented to be “ reordered and redried,” and that those terms import to the trade that the tobaccos are sound and in keeping condition, and that buyer bought relying on these representations, then they must find for the plaintiff: held, proper.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- accepting the use of the actual income figures where the forecast income is close in amount to the actual figures and \was employed as a concession to plaintiff.\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Fauntleroy
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.