Kelly v. Foster
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. V V HIT of error to the Common Pleas of Dauphin.- The declaration by Foster, the plaintiff below, against the administrators of Foster, contained two counts: the first an indebitatus assumpsit, and the second a quantum, meruit, for work labour and services performed for the intestate in his lifetime.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. V V HIT of error to the Common Pleas of Dauphin.- The declaration by Foster, the plaintiff below, against the administrators of Foster, contained two counts: the first an indebitatus assumpsit, and the second a quantum, meruit, for work labour and services performed for the intestate in his lifetime. Upon the trial, the plaintiff gave in evidence a promise by the intestate to give him 200/. if he would live with him until the intestate’s death, and that he accordingly had lived with, and worked for him, up to that time. The defendant’s counsel insisted that the special promise •did…
1Opinion of the Court
Upon this day the judges delivered their opinions.
Tilghman C. J.
This cause comes before us on a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin county. The plaintiff below declared upon an indebitatus assumpsit and quantum meruit for work and services performed by him for James Foster deceased. On the trial he proved, that he had lived with James Foster several years and performed services for him; he also proved a promise by James Foster, that if the plaintiff would live with him till the time of his death, he would give him 200/., and that he did live with *7him. The court told the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company v. Knapp and OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
- Astor v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Stoddard v. MixSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1840
- Harris v. LiggetSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Moore v. Supervisors of Wetzel CountyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.