Legal Opinion

Hampsey v. Duerr

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 1, 1960No. Appeals, 252 and 253PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Musmanno,

The two plaintiffs in this appeal, Bernard J. Hampsey, receiver of Troop Water Heater Company, and Highland Tank and Manufacturing Company, brought separate actions in assumpsit against Frank A. Duerr. The defendants filed preliminary objections which were not sustained. However, the plaintiffs voluntarily terminated their law actions and instituted suits in equity. The defendant again filed preliminary objections and the court held that since the complaints disclosed an adequate remedy at law, the actions in equity would be dismissed. Both plaintiffs appealed.

Th…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McKay v. BeattySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Pinsky v. MasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Richter v. MozenterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  4. Redditt v. HornSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Wilson v. King of Prussia Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Siegel v. EngstromSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  3. Sixsmith v. MartsolfSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  4. Highland Tank & Manufacturing Co. v. DuerrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  5. Setlock v. SutilaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API