(Download) "Buol Machine Co. v. Buckens" by Supreme Court of Connecticut # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

eBook details
- Title: Buol Machine Co. v. Buckens
- Author : Supreme Court of Connecticut
- Release Date : January 21, 1959
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 53 KB
Description
The plaintiff, a manufacturer, sued the
            defendant, a machinery dealer, for damages for
            breach of contract in the sale to the plaintiff of
            a second-hand machine known as a Landis plunge cut
            hydraulic cylindrical grinder. The complaint alleged
            that the machine was defective, that it would not
            operate satisfactorily, that certain parts were
            missing, that it failed to perform the work for
            which it was purchased and that the defendant had
            breached his contract in that he failed to put the
            machine in satisfactory mechanical condition and
            refused to accept its return and to refund the
            purchase price in accordance with a so-called
            guarantee.1 The plaintiff also sought recovery
            for expenses Incurred by it for parts and labor in
            its attempts to get the machine into working order
            and for the losses it sustained by reason of its
            inability to supply customers' demands because of
            the failure of the machine to operate properly.   The defendant, in addition to a general denial
            of certain material allegations of the complaint,
            interposed a special defense the gist of which
            was that the guarantee applied only to machines
            reconditioned by the defendant and, furthermore,
            did not apply to machines sold "subject to
            inspection," and that for both reasons it did
            not apply here because prior to the purchase (a)
            the plaintiff was informed, and knew, that the
            defendant had not reconditioned the machine but
            that the reconditioning had been done by Green
            Brothers in Worcester, Massachusetts, and (b)
            the plaintiff inspected the machine and
            [146 Conn. 641]