Harris v. Blitzstein
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, J.,
The action was in assumpsit. The gist of the plaintiff’s claim, as averred in his statement, was that the defendants, who were private bankers, had agreed, in consideration of the payment to them by the plaintiff of $535, on September 14, 1917, to cause to be credited to his account in the Russian Government Bank in the City of Moscow, within eight weeks thereafter, the sum of three thousand rubles; and that this had not been done. The proof on the trial, in the shape of incontrovertible documentary evidence, was that the plaintiff on that date bought from the defendants…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Lonzer v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Stegmaier v. Keystone Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Boyd v. E. F. Houghton & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- National Bank v. Lake Erie Asphalt Block Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Minute v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Knox v. SimmermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Kehres v. StuempfleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. EisemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Biddle v. HallSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Custis & Co. v. Silent Automatic Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.