Springfield Shingle Co. v. Edgecomb Mill Co.

Citations

• 52 Wash. 620
• 101 P. 233
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1167

Syllabus

<p>Appearance — What Constitutes — Answer. An answer reciting that “now comes the defendant” and alleging facts as a “full and complete and affirmative defense,” constitutes a general appearance.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Process—Waiver oe Service by General Appearance. Error assigned on the denial of a motion to quash service of a summons, is waived by a general appearance and pleading over to the merits.</p> <p>Appeal — Preservation oe Grounds — Amendment oe Pleadings— Objections. Error cannot be predicated upon a verbal amendment to the complaint read into the record at the opening of the trial, allowing a larger recovery, where no objection was made in the court below.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Harmless Error — Evidence. Error on the admission of evidence is harmless on a trial de novo on appeal.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Findings. The findings of the trial judge upon evidence that is very conflicting'will seldom be disturbed on appeal, where he had opportunities of determining the credibility of the witnesses not possessed by' the appellate court.</p> <p>Sales — Quality—Evidence—Sufficiency. Findings that shingles were sold as of “Star A Star” grade, are sustained where the parties contradicted each other, but they were branded, shipped and billed as such, and the price paid was the then ruling market price for that grade.</p> <p>Sales — Damages—Condition Broken — Quality—Caveat Emptob. The principle of caveat emptor does not apply where shingles are sold as “Star A Star,” a grade well known to the trade and by custom conforming to certain specifications; and if not up to grade, the vendee may recover his damages, as for condition broken, although he inspected or had opportunity to inspect them before the sale.</p>