Wilkinson v. Stettler

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Wilkinson v. Stettler, 46 Pa. Super. 407 (1911)
1911 Pa. Super. LEXIS 285
Beav, Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice

Wilkinson v. Stettler

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

We are all of opinion that the words alleged to have been used by the vendor at the time of the sale do not import an express warranty of the truth of the representation; and as no circumstances were shown from which the jury *411could legitimately infer that the vendor intended them to be accepted by the vendee as a warranty, the learned trial judge committed no error in entering a compulsory non-suit and refusing to take it off. This conclusion is so well supported by the opinion filed by him and the Pennsylvania decisions therein cited that further discussion by us would be mere repetition.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Cited By
4 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Contract — Sale—Warranty—Horse. A statement by the vendor of a horse'that the horse is “solid, sound, all right, and would work any place,” does not constitute a warranty, and this is the case although the vendor knows that the-horse is being bought for use in a delivery wagon.