Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Goulding v. Skinner case brief summary

Goulding v. Skinner


-Machine cards weren’t good;  Goulding sues Skinner to recover damages for breach of warranty
-Prevailing rule of the 18th Century  was that a sound price warrants a good commodity
            -Implied warranty of merchantability
-Court says that if you want a warranty then ask for one
-Court refuses to remake contracts through equitable interpretation
-Caveat Emptor:  let the buyer beware
-In McFarland v. Newman (1839), court rules that in the absence of an express warranty, the rule is caveat emptor (this rule gives finality to bargains)

No comments:

Post a Comment

11 Benefits of Studying Criminal Justice

Image Source Have you ever considered a career where each day offers a new challenge and the chance to make a real difference? Studying cr...