Caughey v. Parker
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 92, April T., 1904, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., March T., 1902, No. 565, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of C. P. Caughey and J. A. Bergman, trading as Caughey & Bergman, v. H. J. Parker. Assumpsit on a contract for drilling an oil well.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 92, April T., 1904, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., March T., 1902, No. 565, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of C. P. Caughey and J. A. Bergman, trading as Caughey & Bergman, v. H. J. Parker. Assumpsit on a contract for drilling an oil well. The court entered a compulsory nonsuit, which it subsequently refused to take off, Brown, J., filing the following opinion: This matter arises upon a motion to strike off the compulsory nonsuit in an action by Caughey & Bergman against H. J. Parker, to recover the contract price for drilling a test well for oil and…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Pouter, J.,
The testimony produced by the plaintiffs established that they had entered into a contract with the defendant, who acted in that matter by his agent Foster, to drill for him a well for the purpose of producing oil, the well to be drilled to the third sand, and if dry in the third, to go to the fourth sand, the plaintiffs to be paid for the work at the rate of sixty-five cents a foot. The well was dry in the third sand and the work was continued until the drill had passed through, or almost through, the fourth sand, when the tools were lost in the well and were by the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gillespie Tool Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
3Cited by2 opinions
- Snedaker v. TorpeySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Norris v. ClarkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905