Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

LAS CRUCES MOTOR CO. v. CONOVER.

OPINION OF THE COURT

WATSON, J.

This appeal is from a judgment for the purchase price of farm machinery. The defense was breach of both an alleged express warranty and an alleged implied warranty of efficiency. There was also a cross-complaint for damages occasioned by the breach.

[ 1] The trial court refused to find that the machinery was unfit for the purposes for which designed, and for which appellant contends it was warranted to be efficient. This refusal, unless erroneous, is decisive of the case.

[ 2] There was, no doubt, evidence sufficient, if believed by the trial court, to have warranted him in making the requested finding. But there was also substantial evidence to the contrary. It is contended that appellee's witness was so impeached as to render his testimony unworthy of belief. That was a matter for the trial court to determine.

Under the familiar substantial evidence rule, there is nothing this court can do but affirm the judgment and remand the cause. It is so ordered.

BICKLEY, C.J., and PARKER, J., concur.

CATRON and SIMMS, JJ., did not participate.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LAS CRUCES MOTOR CO. v. CONOVER
(May 8, 1930)