Benjamin Labe & Son v. Lewis Bremer's Sons
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 85, July T., 1894, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., Aug. T., 1893, No. 112, refusing to take off nonsuit. Sheriff’s interpleader to determine the ownership of certain bales of Sumatra tobacco. Before Ermentrout, P. J. At the trial it appeared that plaintiffs were dealers in tobacco in the city of Philadelphia, and that the firm of Wisler & Whitman were cigar manufacturers in the city of Reading.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 85, July T., 1894, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., Aug. T., 1893, No. 112, refusing to take off nonsuit. Sheriff’s interpleader to determine the ownership of certain bales of Sumatra tobacco. Before Ermentrout, P. J. At the trial it appeared that plaintiffs were dealers in tobacco in the city of Philadelphia, and that the firm of Wisler & Whitman were cigar manufacturers in the city of Reading. On April 19, 1893, Jacob Wisler, one of the firm, went to plaintiffs’ place of business, and requested them to discount two notes upon which the firm were indorsers.…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam,
The defendants had caused a levy to be made upon certain Sumatra tobacco in the possession of Wisler & Whitman. The plaintiffs claimed to own it, and on their petition a feigned'issue was awarded. They alleged, and to maintain the issue it was necessary for them to show, that they had been induced to sell the tobacco to Wisler & Whitman in the month of April, 1893, by fraudulent representations; and that upon the discovery of the fraud they had rescinded the contract and reclaimed the goods. The evidence however failed to disclose any trick, artifice, or false representations, made…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Mann v. SalsbergSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Ralph v. FonDersmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Diller v. NelsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899