Maytag v. Vaughn & Sons
Cases that cite this one
13 later published cases cite this decision.
- Taylor v. Rice (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana 1886)
- Joshua Venckus v. City of Iowa City and Andrew Rich (Iowa 2023)
- Wilson & Co. v. United Packinghouse Wkrs. of America (District Court, N.D. Iowa 1960)
- Miller v. Bourne (Okla. 1953)
- Schnathorst v. Williams (Iowa 1949)
- Feldman v. North British & Mercantile Ins. (4th Cir. 1943)
- Richmond v. Whitaker (Iowa 1934)
- Davis v. Stephens (Ga. Ct. App. 1932)
- Sirmans v. Peterson (Ga. Ct. App. 1931)
- Fusario v. Cavallaro (Conn. 1928)
- Allison v. Bryan (Okla. 1915)
- Johnson v. Miller (Iowa 1894)
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railroad v. Watson (Kan. 1887)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
— 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. .
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.