Case Name: LEES-BRADNER v. HOFFMAN CASTING CO.
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1923-04-09
Citations: 1 Ohio Law Abs. 376
Docket Number: No. 4322
Parties: LEES-BRADNER v. HOFFMAN CASTING CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 1
Pages: 376–376

Head Matter:
No. 372
LEES-BRADNER v. HOFFMAN CASTING CO.
Ohio Court of Appeals, Cuyahoga County
No. 4322.
April 9, 1923
This opinion has not been published except in Abs-tract
SALES — (1) Burden, of proof is on buyer to show that the goods delivered do not conform to the contract — (2) Insufficient evidence to establish non-compliance.
Error to Cleveland Municipal Court
Judgment Reversed
Attorneys — M. B. & H. H. Johnson, for Lee& Bradner Co.; Townes & Portman, Contra. j

Opinion:
SULLIVAN, J.
Epitomized Opinion
This was an action for damages for breach ol contract; The Hoffman Bronze & Alumnium Casting Co. agreed to furnish the defendant certain meta' castings composed of virgin metal. This virgir metal was to correspond, as per the terms of th< contract, to certain standards of analyses. The cast was tried before Judge Beebe of the Municipal Cour and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff for $1141.24 The defendant prosecuted error to the Court o; Appeals upon the ground that there was insuffieien evidence to show that the metal used was virgii metal. In reversing the lower court the Court p: Appeals held:
1. The burden of proof was upon the plaintjf to show by preponderance of evidence that virgii metal was not used in the manufacture of tH< castings. s
2. As the proof was insufficient to show that thi metal used was not virgin metal, the judgment ó: the lower court must be reversed, as the only wit ness testifying as to the nature of the metal usf< showed manifestly and grossly inadequate knowledd'i on this subject. 1