Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bekkevold v. Potts, 216 N.W. 790.

44 citing documents.

Dougall v. Brown Bay Boat Works and Sales, Inc. 178 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1970
Dougall v. Brown Bay Boat Works and Sales, Inc. 178 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1970
Iron Fireman Coal Stoker Co. v. Brown, 182 Minn. 399 , ; Federal Motor Truck Sales Corp. v. Shanus, 190 Minn. 5 , ; Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
Kopet v. Klein 148 N.W.2d 385 Minn. 1967
Kopet v. Klein 148 N.W.2d 385 Minn. 1967
In Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 89 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, 1166, we said: “ ‘An implied warranty is not one of the contractual elements of an agreement.
Robertson Lumber Co. v. Stephen Farmers Cooperative Elevator Co. 143 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1966
Robertson Lumber Co. v. Stephen Farmers Cooperative Elevator Co. 143 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1966
Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , *24 89, ; Beck v. Spindler, 256 Minn. 543, 558 , 99 N. W. (2d) 670, 680 .
Balkowitsch v. Minneapolis War Memorial Blood Bank, Inc. 132 N.W.2d 805 Minn. 1965
Balkowitsch v. Minneapolis War Memorial Blood Bank, Inc. 132 N.W.2d 805 Minn. 1965
We pointed out in Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 89 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, 1166, that the origin and purpose of the implied warranty was “* * * to promote high standards in business and to discourage sharp dealings.
Riviera Imports, Inc. v. Anderson Used Cars, Inc. 128 N.W.2d 159 Minn. 1964
Riviera Imports, Inc. v. Anderson Used Cars, Inc. 128 N.W.2d 159 Minn. 1964
5 Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164; Beck v. Spindler, 256 Minn. 543 , 99 N. W. (2d) 670 .
Beck v. Spindler 99 N.W.2d 670 Minn. 1959
Beck v. Spindler 99 N.W.2d 670 Minn. 1959
In Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 89 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, 1166, we said: 12 “An implied warranty is not one of the contractual elements of an agreement.
McCree & Company v. State 91 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 1958
McCree & Company v. State 91 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 1958
* * * Plaintiff does not seek to void the contract but claims additional sums because of difficulties in excavation greater than those indicated in the specifications.” The state has cited Dworsky v. Vermes Credit Jewelry, Inc. 244 Minn. 62 , 69 N. W. (2d) 118 , and Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, as authority for the abstract proposition that warranties implied in contravention of the actual intention of the party do not make a true contract and thus that this action is t
Luther v. Standard Conveyor Co. 89 N.W.2d 179 Minn. 1958
Luther v. Standard Conveyor Co. 89 N.W.2d 179 Minn. 1958
1 Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 89 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
Dworsky v. Vermes Credit Jewelry, Inc. 69 N.W.2d 118 Minn. 1955
Dworsky v. Vermes Credit Jewelry, Inc. 69 N.W.2d 118 Minn. 1955
Since the existence of an implied warranty is a question of law and does not arise out of a contract *67 or the intention of the parties (Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 89 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164), the trial court’s “finding of fact” to the effect that the Dworsky Agency warranted that it would deliver a policy complying with the laws of this state is a mere conclusion of law and is not binding upon this court.
Nelson v. the Swedish Hospital 64 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1954
Nelson v. the Swedish Hospital 64 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1954
In this respect it is distinguishable from the terms employed by the vendors in Federal Motor Truck Sales Corp. v. Shanus, 190 Minn. 5 , ; National Equipment Corp. v. Moore, 189 Minn. 632 , ; and Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, cases wherein it was held that the exclusion of liability for breach of express warranties suggested the intention not to exclude it for breach of those implied by law.
Inland Products Corp. v. Donovan Inc. 62 N.W.2d 211 Minn. 1953
Inland Products Corp. v. Donovan Inc. 62 N.W.2d 211 Minn. 1953
See, Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
McPeak v. Boker 53 N.W.2d 130 Minn. 1952
McPeak v. Boker 53 N.W.2d 130 Minn. 1952
ller to the purchaser unless expressly written hereon at the date of purchase.” *423 This court held that this language did not exclude implied warranty, saying ( 190 Minn. 10 , ): “* * * Implied warranties are for the protection of the buyer, and if the seller desires to exclude the same from the article sold it should be done in direct and plain language * * In Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 88 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, a contract stated: “No warranties have been made * * * unless * * * written
Despatch Oven Co. v. Rauenhorst 40 N.W.2d 73 Minn. 1949
Despatch Oven Co. v. Rauenhorst 40 N.W.2d 73 Minn. 1949
§§ 512.13, *444 512.14, 512.15 (U. S. A. §§ 13, 14, 15); Federal M. T. Sales Corp. v. Shanus, 190 Minn. 5 , ; Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164; Moorhead v. Minneapolis Seed Co. 139 Minn. 11 , , L. R. A. 1918C, 391, Ann. Cas.
Pietrus v. J. R. Watkins Co. 38 N.W.2d 799 Minn. 1949
Pietrus v. J. R. Watkins Co. 38 N.W.2d 799 Minn. 1949
See, also, Anderson v. Van Doren, 142 Minn. 237 , ; Hjorth v. Albert Lea Machinery Co. 142 Minn. 387 , ; Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
Juvland v. Wood Brothers Thresher Co. 3 N.W.2d 772 Minn. 1942
Juvland v. Wood Brothers Thresher Co. 3 N.W.2d 772 Minn. 1942
See Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164; Iron Fireman Coal Stoker Co. v. Brown, 182 Minn. 399 , ; E. Edelman & Co. v. Queen Stove Works, Inc. *314 205 Minn. 7 , .
E. Edelman & Co. v. Queen Stove Works, Inc. 284 N.W. 838 Minn. 1939
E. Edelman & Co. v. Queen Stove Works, Inc. 284 N.W. 838 Minn. 1939
Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
Mallery v. Northfield Seed Co. 264 N.W. 573 Minn. 1936
Mallery v. Northfield Seed Co. 264 N.W. 573 Minn. 1936
See on this question Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 90 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164; National Equipment Corp. v. Moore, 189 Minn. 632, 635-636 , .
Federal Motor Truck Sales Corp. v. Shanus 250 N.W. 713 Minn. 1933
Federal Motor Truck Sales Corp. v. Shanus 250 N.W. 713 Minn. 1933
It would seem that the decision in Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87, 88 , , 59 A. L. E. 1161, answers the question in favor of the buyer.
National Equipment Corp. v. Moore 250 N.W. 677 Minn. 1933
National Equipment Corp. v. Moore 250 N.W. 677 Minn. 1933
1927, § 8390) in Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
Alford v. Kruse 235 N.W. 903 Minn. 1931
Alford v. Kruse 235 N.W. 903 Minn. 1931
The case is within the principle of Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164, though that involved the sale of a tractor, and other similar cases.
Iron Fireman Coal Stoker Co. v. Brown 234 N.W. 685 Minn. 1931
Iron Fireman Coal Stoker Co. v. Brown 234 N.W. 685 Minn. 1931
Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , 59 A. L. R. 1164.
A. E. Little Co. v. John W. Thomas & Co., Inc. 218 N.W. 242 Minn. 1928
A. E. Little Co. v. John W. Thomas & Co., Inc. 218 N.W. 242 Minn. 1928
In Bekkevold v. Potts, 173 Minn. 87 , , we held that where'the parties contracted that “no warranties have been made” this did not destroy the implied warranty imposed by law.