Worcester Mfg. Co. v. Waterbury Brass Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Union Indemnity Co. v. Home Trust Co.

    64 F.2d 906 (8th Cir. 1933)   Cited 7 times

    There are, however, cases holding that, when a contract for the purchase of goods is executed and no fraud is involved, the buyer is left to his action for damages for breach of warranty. Worcester Mfg. Co. v. Waterbury Brass Co., 73 Conn. 554, 48 A. 422; La Grange v. Coyle, 50 Ind. App. 140, 98 N.E. 75; Wirth v. Fawkes, 109 Minn. 254, 123 N.W. 661, 134 Am. St. Rep. 778. See 2 Williston on Sales (2d Ed. 1924) § 608a; 55 Corpus Juris, p. 269.

  2. Balto. Machine v. Holtite

    241 Md. 36 (Md. 1965)   Cited 5 times

    See also Annot., "What amounts to a `sale by sample' as regards warranties," 12 A.L.R.2d 524, 552 (and cases collected under Paragraph VI, § 16 "View that goods need not be in existence"). See also Pike v. Fay, 101 Mass. 134; Worcester Mfg. Co. v. Waterbury Brass Co. (Conn.), 48 A. 422; Ideal Wrench Co. v. Garvin Mach. Co., 72 N.Y.S. 662; Arco Metalscraft Co. v. Shaw (Pa.), 70 A.2d 850; Livingston Shirt Corp. v. Great Lakes Garment Mfg. Co. (Mich.), 88 N.W.2d 614; Roth v. Continental Wire Co. (Mo.), 68 S.W. 594; Hal Mfg. Co. v. Schoenling Brewing Co. (Ohio), 168 N.E.2d 1; Modern Farm Service, Inc. v. Ben Pearson, Inc., 308 F.2d 18, 23-24 (5th Cir.). Baltimore Machine did not challenge the fact that the dowel pullers which were delivered to Holtite after the first fifty did not correspond in quality to the production model.