St. Paul White Lead & Oil Co. v. Tibbetts

Citations

• 13 S.D. 446
• 83 N.W. 564
• 1900 S.D. LEXIS 169

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action against the purchasers of certain paints to recover the contract price, the defense was that there had been a breach of warranty, in that the paints contained no lead, and the purchaser testified that the paint was not worth more than 75 cents a gallon at the place where he did business. Held, that it was proper to ask defendant on his cross-examination as to what price per gallon he had obtained for the paint.</p> <p>2. Where in an action against the purchaser of certain paint, the defense was that there had been a breach of warranty in that the paint contained no-lead, and the defendant testified that it was not worth more than 75 cents a gallon at retail, it was competent to introduce in evidence a letter written by defendant, after becoming- familiar with the quality of the paint, offering to pay plaintiff a dollar a gallon for such paint</p> <p>3. An objection to testimony that it is “incompetent, immaterial, and irrelevant” is not sufficiently specific to present for review a' question as to the admissibility of the testimony.</p>