Gross v. Ricchezza
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 116, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1908, No. 2,340, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Ignatius Gross v. Antonio Ricchezza. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered,' Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 116, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1908, No. 2,340, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Ignatius Gross v. Antonio Ricchezza. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered,' Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was order discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,, The plaintiff’s claim consists of two branches, first, for the price of foodstuff which he alleges and the defendant admits he ordered, second, for the.price of similar goods delivered to the defendant which the latter alleges he did not order. As to the *442second branch of the claim the defendant alleges, in addition to the fact that he did not order the goods, that they were so unsound, so unfit for household consumption, so unmerchantable, so filled with sand or grit and so sour that they were wholly useless- and worthless. This fairly puts in issue the question of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Moore v. EyreSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hays v. AndersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915