Coit v. Schwartz
Citation: 29 Kan.344 (1883) · Decided: 1883-01 · Court: Kansas Supreme Court. Full reporter opinion retrieved from the Caselaw Access Project; this is an unofficial host of primary judicial text, with the original JSON preserved.
Source note (2026-10-18):
- Links on this page to
https://static.case.law/kan/29/cases/0344-01.jsonare an (unofficial Caselaw Access Project copy, retrieved before 2026-10-18; host disallows automated access); no official or otherwise permitted full-text copy was located on 2026-10-18.
Facts
Sellers sued on a contract for 4000 pounds of pure white-lead paint at USD 220 delivered to Salina within 30 days. Buyer alleged prompt examination revealed adulterated inferior paint, immediate rejection/tender, and USD 36.90 freight/cartage paid before discovery. Sellers challenged defenses by demurrer.
Holding And Reasoning
Affirmed. Alleged adulteration sufficiently pleaded delivery of an article different from the described contract goods; purity was an identity/condition term, not merely an un pleaded technical warranty. Promptly rejecting buyer could recover freight/cartage and claim the asserted lien for those outlays. Seller nonperformance supported recoupment of contract damages measured against the pleaded market price; Hunter v Lee involved different specific-goods/non default facts. This was a pleading sufficiency decision, not a completed lien sale or third-party priority adjudication.
Practical Impact And Verified Treatment
Current 84-2-711(3) supplies a statutory rejecting/revoking buyer security interest for price payments and reasonable expenses, and 84-2-706 governs resale/accounting.84-9-110 supplies special perfection/priority until debtor possession. Coit does not independently authorize an unrestricted 58-208 auction or prove priority against every lender. Its freight/rejection category is now mapped to that statutory buyer regime, not double-counted as a second common-law creation.
Primary decision: 29 Kan.344 (1883). Current statutes/later primary treatment: 84-2-711, 84-2-706, 84-9-110, 58-208.
Status Boundary
The complete holding and the stated statutory/later-opinion treatment are verified. This is not a comprehensive still-good-law certificate or an assertion that every later citing decision has been reviewed. No negative-treatment conclusion is inferred from an empty search. The cited older provisions apply only to the historical transaction unless current text is separately identified.
Applies In
kansas · court-ordered-administrative-and-creditor-sales
Legal information, not legal advice. Verify the current primary authorities and actual transaction/order before acting.