Fotterall v. Armour
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 393, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1903, No. 1,382, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Stephen B. Fotterall v. Jonathan O, Armour. Assumpsit for rent.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 393, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1903, No. 1,382, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Stephen B. Fotterall v. Jonathan O, Armour. Assumpsit for rent. Before Bregy, J. In addition to the facts stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court it appeared at the trial that the letters of July 14 and August 10, 1898, were in full as follows: “ July 14th, 1898. “ 7 & 9 Manhattan Market, N. Y. “Mr. S. B. Fotterall, “No. 622 North 19th St., Phila., Pa. “ Dear Sir:— “ On my return to New York I found your letter of July 7th returning check…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion bv
Mr. Justice Mestrezat,
By a lease dated September, 1885, Stephen B. Eotterall, the plaintiff, leased to Jonathan O. Armour, the defendant, “ all that property known as No. 400 S. Delaware Ave. and No. 401 Penn St. for the term of five years to commence and be computed from the first day of January, 1886.” The two properties are on the south side of and adjacent to Pine street, the first fronting eighteen feet on Delaware avenue and the other fronting twenty feet on Penn street, and the buildings are separated by a brick wall in the rear. The annual rental was $2,000, payable…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Kahn v. Bancamerica-Blair Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Friedman v. Colonial Oil Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1945
- Holmes Electric Protective Co. v. GoldsteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Efco Importers v. HalsobrunnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
- Brown v. BrownSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.