Legal Opinion

Smullin v. Harenski

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 15, 1932No. Appeal 193PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Parker, J.,

The sole question presented is whether the verdict rendered by the jury will support the judgment entered. The parties were each funeral directors and at various times loaned each other automobiles so that at the time of the bringing of the suit the plaintiff had furnished to the defendant more service than he had received. Action in assumpsit was brought to recover a balance claimed to be due from the defendant for the use of automobiles furnished by plaintiff for funeral purposes. On the trial the plaintiff produced evidence showing the fair value of such service. The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bruck v. MausburySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
  2. Bickham v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
  3. Butcher v. Metts, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1836
  4. Glass v. BlairSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Maize v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  2. United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. HessDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. MFA Cooperative Ass'n of Ash Grove v. ElliottMissouri Court of Appeals · 1972
  4. Jones Et Ux. v. StifflerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Emblem Oil Co. v. TaylorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

8 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