Barrows v. Mazaltov's, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Barrows v. Mazaltov's, Inc.

252 N.W.2d 130, 312 Minn. 586, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1598

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMarch 18, 1977

DocketNo. 46404

StatusPublished

This text of 252 N.W.2d 130 (Barrows v. Mazaltov's, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barrows v. Mazaltov's, Inc., 252 N.W.2d 130, 312 Minn. 586, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1598 (Mich. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, June H. Barrows, purchased from defendant, Mazaltov’s, Inc., an original design and materials for a needlepoint rug. The design embodied a floral pattern on a beige background. The yarn which plaintiff incorporated into the background varied in color. Consequently, plaintiff instituted this action for damages, alleging breach of contract, breach of implied warranties of merchantability and fitness (Minn.St. 336.2-314 and 336.2-315), breach of express warranty (Minn.St. 336.2-313), and fraud. The case was tried to the court without a jury. Plaintiff prevailed upon the contract and warranty grounds. The court found that the value of the rug as warranted was $14,000 and its value as made was $7,000. Accordingly, it awarded plaintiff $7,000. Defendant appeals from the judgment.

We find no reversible error.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, June H. Barrows, purchased from defendant, Mazaltov’s, Inc., an original design and materials for a needlepoint rug. The design embodied a floral pattern on a beige background. The yarn which plaintiff incorporated into the background varied in color. Consequently, plaintiff instituted this action for damages, alleging breach of contract, breach of implied warranties of merchantability and fitness (Minn.St. 336.2-314 and 336.2-315), breach of express warranty (Minn.St. 336.2-313), and fraud. The case was tried to the court without a jury. Plaintiff prevailed upon the contract and warranty grounds. The court found that the value of the rug as warranted was $14,000 and its value as made was $7,000. Accordingly, it awarded plaintiff $7,000. Defendant appeals from the judgment.

We find no reversible error.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 N.W.2d 130, 312 Minn. 586, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrows-v-mazaltovs-inc-minn-1977.