Case ID: ill-app_211/html/0421-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice McDonald", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Ozonized Ox Marrow Company, Appellant, v. M. L. Barrett & Company, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 23,616.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Sales, § 141
      
       — necessity that goods conform to representation as well as to sample. Where goods are sold by sample and representation, the fact that they conform to the sample submitted is not sufficient as they must be in accordance with the representation as well.
    2. Sales, § 141* — when shown that commodity was not “oil of orange’’ as represented. Evidence held to sustain a finding that a commodity was purchased by sample on representation that it was “oil of orange,” but that, although it may have conformed to the sample, it was not “oil of orange” as represented.
    3. Customs and usages, § 26* — when evidence of custom as to 
      
      ■meaning of term “oil of orange” is not inadmissible. Evidence of a custom in the chemical industry that the term “oil of orange” refers only to a commodity conforming to the formula of the United States Pharmacopreia is not inadmissible on the ground that the vendor, not being in the drug or chemical business, could not he charged with knowledge of the custom, if it existed, where the evidence in behalf of the vendee showed that the vendor agreed to deliver “oil of orange” in conformity with such formula.
    
      Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Dennis W. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 14, 1918.
    Rehearing denied June 22, 1918.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by The Ozonized Ox Marrow Company, plaintiff, against M. L. Barrett & Company, defendant, to recover the value of a quantity of “washed oil of orange” sold and delivered to defendant. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    Olaf A. Olson, for appellant; Bull, Lytton & Olson, of counsel.
    Musgrave, Oppenheim & Lee, for appellee.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice McDonald

delivered the opinion of the court.