Taylor v. Siers
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 33, March T., 1916, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1913, No. 394, for defendant n. o. v. in case of E. J. Taylor v. Wm. M. Siers and Bussell Uhl, doing business as Wm. M. Siers Cigar Company. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 33, March T., 1916, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1913, No. 394, for defendant n. o. v. in case of E. J. Taylor v. Wm. M. Siers and Bussell Uhl, doing business as Wm. M. Siers Cigar Company. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before Woodward, J. From the record it appeared that pending suit, but before the trial of the case, one of the joint defendants, Russel Uhl, died, and plaintiff, upon learning of his death, suggested of record his death, and a substitution thereon, of John H. Uhl, executor, and Sarah H. Uhl, executrix, but no service of a…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hendekson, J.,
This action was brought against William M. Siers and Russell Uhl doing business as the Wm. M. Siers Cigar Company. The action was based on a contract alleged to have been entered into by the plaintiff with the defendants. The summons was regularly served on the defendants an appearance entered for them and an affidavit of defense filed. Uhl, one of the defendants, having died, the plaintiff suggested of record his death and the substitution of his executors. This was done November 25, 1914. The case was called to trial June 5, 1915, Rush Trescott, Esq., appearing for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McCullough v. Railway Mail Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Ash v. GuieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881
- Dowling v. McGregorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
- Danville v. RhodesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Hill v. TrubySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.