Adams v. James L. Leeds Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 393, Jan. T., 1899, by-defendants, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1897, No. 549, on verdict for plaintiff. Issue to determine the validity of a confessed judgment. Before McMichael, J. The court charged as follows: On June 12, 1896, James L. Leeds, who seems to have been in business, and the owner of certain machinery, assigned it to a Mr. John H. Scott, for value.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 393, Jan. T., 1899, by-defendants, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1897, No. 549, on verdict for plaintiff. Issue to determine the validity of a confessed judgment. Before McMichael, J. The court charged as follows: On June 12, 1896, James L. Leeds, who seems to have been in business, and the owner of certain machinery, assigned it to a Mr. John H. Scott, for value. We have not been told the history of the transaction in full, but it appears from the papers that there was a bill of sale from Leeds to Scott. On November 13, 1896, Scott assigned, transferred and…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cukiam,
The only question to which consideration was given on the trial of the case was whether the indebtedness of Leeds to Adams was assumed by the partnership. It was a question of fact referred to the jury for determination upon the evidence. The verdict was in accord with the evidence, and established the claim of the plaintiff that the debt was assumed by the firm. There was nothing in the charge opposed to the decision of the jury or requiring a reversal of the judgment. The learned counsel representing the defendants on the appeal were not participants in the trial, and were…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Grier & Co. v. HoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1855
- Ross v. HowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mahler v. FreemanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- In re Sickman & GlennDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1907