Ueberroth v. Riegel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh county: No. 82, to July Term 1870. This' was an action of assumpsit by John Riegel and Stephen Riegel, trading as Riegel & Brother, against Jacob J. Ueberroth. The writ was issued December 17th 1868. The cause was tried, April 18th 1870, before Longaker, P. J. The plaintiffs, under objection that the paper was not stamped, and exception, gave in evidence this paper:— “ Eriedensville, Dec. 15th 1865. “ Riegel & Bro.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh county: No. 82, to July Term 1870. This' was an action of assumpsit by John Riegel and Stephen Riegel, trading as Riegel & Brother, against Jacob J. Ueberroth. The writ was issued December 17th 1868. The cause was tried, April 18th 1870, before Longaker, P. J. The plaintiffs, under objection that the paper was not stamped, and exception, gave in evidence this paper:— “ Eriedensville, Dec. 15th 1865. “ Riegel & Bro. “ Sirs: Please give the bearer, Henry Pink, the goods which he will select, not exceeding over five hundred and fifty dollars, on my…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, by
Williams, J.
The written order on which the goods in this case were delivered, is not such an instrument as requires a stamp to render it admissible in evidence under the provisions of the Stamp Act. It does not come within the description of any of the instruments, specifically mentioned in the schedule, upon which a stamp duty is imposed, and therefore it is not subject to a stamp tax unless it is taxable as an “ agreement or contract not otherwise specified” therein. Put it is clear that it is not an agreement or contract within the meaning of this…
2Cited by2 opinions
- United Factors Corp. v. MogulSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- State v. WeinerNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1942