Anderson Bros. Corp. v. O'Meara
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
306 F.2d 672 (1962)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Anderson Brothers Corp. (Anderson) (defendant) offered for sale a barge dredge that was designed for digging shallow trenches for burying pipeline under water. Robert O’Meara (plaintiff) needed a dredge to dig wide, deep canals. Testimony at trial indicated that Anderson’s dredge was not suitable for O’Meara’s purposes without expensive modifications. O’Meara saw Anderson’s advertisement and contacted Gier, an Anderson employee. During the discussion, Gier assumed that O’Meara needed a dredge for only shallow digging. O’Meara then sent Kennedy, one of his employees, to inspect the dredge. Kennedy knew a lot about engines, but did not know much, if anything, about dredges. Nonetheless, Kennedy inspected the dredge and approved it for O’Meara’s purchase. After O’Meara received the dredge, he realized that it was not immediately suited for his purposes. O’Meara brought suit based on mutual mistake, among other things. The trial court found that there was mutual mistake as to the dredge’s capabilities and awarded O’Meara damages. Anderson appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.