Diamond Textile Machine Works, Inc. v. International Batting Mills
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
1Opinion of the Court
Taulane, J.,
This is a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence.
The plaintiff seeks to recover from the defendant commissions for selling machinery.
The agreement for commissions is in writing, and under its terms the commissions are payable to the plaintiff. The defendant denies liability on the ground that the commissions are not payable to the plaintiff alone, but jointly to the plaintiff and one A. J. Mellman.
The affidavit of defence sets up this defence, as follows: “Deponent is informed by one A. J. Mellman, believes and, therefore, avers, that the purchasers, A.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kountz v. HolthouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- Armstrong v. City of LancasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Tritt's Administrator v. Colwell's AdministratorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1858
- Appeals of the City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
- North Penn Iron Co. v. International Lithoid Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.