Kauffman Milling Co. v. Stuckey

Citations

• 40 S.C. 110
• 18 S.E. 218
• 1893 S.C. LEXIS 8

Syllabus

<p>I. Case Criticised — Sams—Rescission.—The ruling in Kauffman Milling Co. v. Stuckey, 37 S. C., 7, approved, and the doctrine reaffirmed, that where personal property has been purchased by sample at a sound price, the purchaser has no right to rescind unless (1) there was an agreement at the time of purchase, that if the article did not come up to the sample or implied warranty, the purchaser might return it, or (2) there has been fraud, or (3) an entire failure of consideration.1</p> <p>2. Sales — Rescission—Liability.-.—Where a merchant purchases by sample fifty barrels of flour at a sound price, and sells fourteen of these barrels, and from knowledge thus acquired then claims that the whole lot is worthless, and offers to return the unsold barrels, which offer is refused, the merchant would be liable for the barrels sold, even if the jury should believe that the whole lot was worthless.</p>