McCarthy v. Murray
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 243, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiff, from judgment, of O. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1903, No. 4,206, for defendant non obstante veredicto in case of Patrick J. McCarthy v. Elizabeth L. Murray, trading as James J. Murray & Co. Assumpsit to recover compensation for services. Before Ferguson, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 243, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiff, from judgment, of O. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1903, No. 4,206, for defendant non obstante veredicto in case of Patrick J. McCarthy v. Elizabeth L. Murray, trading as James J. Murray & Co. Assumpsit to recover compensation for services. Before Ferguson, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict for plaintiff for $1,005.50. Subsequently the court entered judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The plaintiff had been employed as a superintendent of a glass manufacturing plant owned and operated by James J. Murray, for nearly two years prior to November 10, 1901, on which date Mr. Murray died. During Murray’s life, the plaintiff received a salary of $30.00 per week, which was.paid weekly, and it was alleged that he was entitled under an agreement to an additional annual compensation of $500, which was to be paid at the end of each year. After the death of Mr. Murray, the business was conducted by his widow, who was his sole legatee and executrix, and a few…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Colonial Trust Co. v. GetzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Casey v. CanningSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Pratt & Reath v. H. M. Richards Jewelry Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871