Standard Rope & Twine Co. v. Olmem

Citations

• 13 S.D. 296
• 83 N.W. 271
• 1900 S.D. LEXIS 145

Syllabus

<p>1. Under Comp. Laws, § 3635, providing that one who sells merchandise inaccessible to examination by the buyer thereby warrants that it is sound and merchantable, a manufacturer who sells binding twine in balls, with a tag attached to each ball, reciting, “Every ball guarantied of superior quality,” is bound to know whether it is fit for the purpose indicated, and for which the purchase was made.</p> <p>2. Where in an action for the price of binding- twine, defendant claims that it was unfit for the purposes for which it was sold, evidence is admissible to show that the quality of the twine rendered it more susceptible to the action of crickets, by reason of which it was almost totally destroyed after the grain was bound.</p> <p>3. After the receipt of defendant’s order for a car load of Sisal binding twine, plaintiff sent defendant a sample bag of Sisal twine, of excellent quality, which was labeled “Crown Brand.” When the car load arrived, the twine was labeled “Sewall Day Brand,” and was of an inferior quality. Held, in an action for the price, that evidence concerning what plaintiff denominated a “sample bag,” in rendering its account, was properly admitted. -</p> <p>Corson, J., dissenting.</p>