{
  "id": 8698854,
  "name": "Galbraith v. Whyte",
  "name_abbreviation": "Galbraith v. Whyte",
  "decision_date": "1797-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "535",
  "last_page": "536",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Hayw. 535"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "2 N.C. 535"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Super. Ct.",
    "id": 22358,
    "name": "North Carolina Superior Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "3 Hawks 59",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Hawks",
      "case_ids": [
        11276569
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "101"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/10/0059-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "3 Murph. 241",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mur.",
      "case_ids": [
        8689497
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/7/0241-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Murph. 33",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mur.",
      "case_ids": [
        8684007
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/6/0033-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "1 Murph. 97",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mur.",
      "case_ids": [
        11275425,
        11275412
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/5/0097-02",
        "/nc/5/0097-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 182,
    "char_count": 1591,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.329,
    "sha256": "e88ac049c412c395d6631effd389ef58eeea1897004a9d1eb88997b9a3a4c542",
    "simhash": "1:cabfd78c0fb2037d",
    "word_count": 293
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:10:25.463344+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Galbraith v. Whyte."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per curiam\nCaveat- empfor. applies where a man purchases an article of personal property not in the vendor\u2019s possession, fie ought i \u201d. such case to require a warranty \u25a0 \u2014 the not being in possession gives reason to doubt.\u2014 Another case is, where the thing \u00abold has some visible qu.ilhy which lessen\u25a0\u00bb its value. Where it has a quality less-ming its value, and that is not .discoverable by ordinary inspection, it is on erwese ; in such case tin re is no need of an exo-ess warranty \u2014 every man is hmmd to be honest \u2014 he ought to discover to the vendee all such pro-pcj\u2019ties as if known might probably dispose-him not to. purchase* If a man sell an unsound horse, whose disor-des- is not known,, and receives full value as for a -ound horse, an action lies against the vendor; and that action may be an-assumpsit stating the. sale, and that the vendor undertook that the horse was sound.\nNote. \u2014 Upon the subject of warranty on the sale of chattels, see Bull. N. P. ( Brid. Ed. 30, a. to 32, b. Comyn\u2019s on Con. 228 to 250. Cooper\u2019s Justinian. 609. Thompson v. Tate, 1 Murph. 97. Lanier v. Auld's Adm\u2019r. v. Ibid. Sheber v. Robinson & others, 2 Murph. 33. Gil. christ v Marrows 2 Car. Law Rep. 607. Erwin v. Maxwell 3 Murph. 241. Ayres v. Parks\u2019 Adm'r. &c. 3 Hawks 59. Inge v. Bond & Slaughter, Ibid. 101. Brittain v. Israel & others, Ibid. 222. It will be seen, from some of the authorities referred lo, that the position \u00bbh:\u00bbt a full price for a horse implies a warramy of soundness,.although once supposed to be law, is now overruled, both in England and in this State-",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per curiam"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Galbraith v. Whyte."
  },
  "file_name": "0535-01",
  "first_page_order": 541,
  "last_page_order": 542
}