Maytag v. Vaughn & Sons
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Servers, J.
— The property in controversy consists of certain corn planters. Several errors are assigned, but they simply amount to this, that the court erred in finding for the defendants. •
The defendants claim the goods were furnished to them by the manufacturers, under a contract that if not sold in 1882 they were, to be carried over until 1883, and then sold and accounted for. The evidence is largely in writing. We have each separately examined the evidence, and separately reached the conclusion that the circuit court correctly determined the facts, and therefore the judgment is correct. No possible benefit to any one could accrue by setting out the evidence and stating our reasons at length.
Affirmed. .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 13 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Courts of Appeals1
- Federal District Courts1
- Historical Federal Courts1
- State Highest Courts8
- State Appellate Courts2
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.