Lautner v. Kann
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 60, Oct. T., 1897, by-defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Oo., Sept. T., 1895, No. 378, on verdict for plaintiffs. Assumpsit on a book account. Before Stowe, P. J. . The facts appear by the charge of the court, which was as follows: In this case the plaintiffs make out their case by the admitted evidence.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 60, Oct. T., 1897, by-defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Oo., Sept. T., 1895, No. 378, on verdict for plaintiffs. Assumpsit on a book account. Before Stowe, P. J. . The facts appear by the charge of the court, which was as follows: In this case the plaintiffs make out their case by the admitted evidence. There is no question that Mr. Holstein did furnish the amount of leather that is claimed for, and in a general way there is no question as to the prices. There is a question as to some matters about which you heard the testimony, that is,- as to the amount…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb,. Justice Fell,
The action was on a book account for goods sold. The defendant attempted to establish, as a set-off to the plaintiffs’ demand, a claim for damages for the breach of a contract to furnish other goods, and at the trial the main question was whether the contract alleged by the defendant had been made. The contract set up was oral, and the only witness called to establish it failed to define its terms with clearness or accuracy. The court left it to the jury to determine whether a contract had been entered into and, if so, what were its terms. This action of the court…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. StarksIndiana Court of Appeals · 1914
- Colonial Trust Co. v. GetzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Lerch v. Hershey Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Haller v. HallerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Trexler v. AfricaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.