Hindman v. Pittsburgh Trust Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 137, Oct. T., 1919, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1918, No. 1992, on verdict for plaintiff in case of James E. Hindman v. Pittsburgh Trust Co., Receiver of the Pittsburgh Exposition Park Association. Assumpsit for professional services.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 137, Oct. T., 1919, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1918, No. 1992, on verdict for plaintiff in case of James E. Hindman v. Pittsburgh Trust Co., Receiver of the Pittsburgh Exposition Park Association. Assumpsit for professional services. Before Cohen, J. At the trial the following offer was made: “By Mr. Balph: Counsel for defendant offer to ask the witness, on cross-examination, as testing the correctness of his testimony as to $5,000 being a reasonable fee for his services in this matter, whether or not he did not, immediately after the money was…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Walling,
This is an action of assumpsit for legal services. To the major base ball leagues, viz: the American League and the National League, a third, known as the Federal League, was added in 1912. The latter established clubs in Baltimore, Brooklyn, Newark and Pittsburgh, but proved a disturbing factor in the national game to such an extent that in December, 1915, the three leagues made an agreement known as “the peace agreement,” by which the Federal league was to retire from the field and its several clubs were to be reimbursed by the major leagues for expenses…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Adriatic Fire Insurance v. TreadwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- M'Cready v. FreedlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
3Cited by1 opinion
- Des Moines Elevator & Grain Co. v. Underwriters' Grain Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1933