Caulk v. Everly
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleás for the City and County of Philadelphia. In the court below, an action of assumpsit for goods sold, &c., was brought in the name of John Hooper, for the use of Miller N. Everly, against Oliver Caulk, to recover for goods sold by the plaintiff to the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleás for the City and County of Philadelphia. In the court below, an action of assumpsit for goods sold, &c., was brought in the name of John Hooper, for the use of Miller N. Everly, against Oliver Caulk, to recover for goods sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. On the trial before Randall, J., on the 23d of December, 1839, the book of original entries of Hooper was produced and proved, in which there appeared various charges, against the defendant, of sand, gravel, &c. furnished. The witness who proved the book, on his cross-examination, said: “ This was for…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
That a contract cannot rest partly in writing and partly in parol, was asserted in Share v. Anderson; and doubtless there are authorities to show that all stipulations on the same subject, and at the same time, constitute but one agreement. But letting and repairing are so far different that they may be subjects of distinct contracts; and as the execution of the lease was complete, in this instance, by the sealing and delivery—the attestation of it by witnesses being unessential—the agreement to repair was made at a time subsequent to it.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Christ v. DiffenbachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1815
- Miller v. HendersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1823
- Appeal by WithersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826
- Bollinger v. EckertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827
- Harvey v. SnowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1792
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Potter v. GrimmSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915