Huckestein v. Kelly & Jones Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY DEPENDANTS PB.OM THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OP ALLEGHENY COHNTY. No. 83 October Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 73 June Term 1889, C. P. No. 1. On March 15, 1889, a summons was served in assumpsit by John and Henry Huckestein, trading as Huckestein & Co., against the Kelly & Jones Co. Issue.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY DEPENDANTS PB.OM THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OP ALLEGHENY COHNTY. No. 83 October Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 73 June Term 1889, C. P. No. 1. On March 15, 1889, a summons was served in assumpsit by John and Henry Huckestein, trading as Huckestein & Co., against the Kelly & Jones Co. Issue. At the trial on February 3, 1890, the plaintiffs introduced evidence tending to prove performance of a written contract, dated July 7, 1888, whereby for a stipulated sum they uAder-toolc to erect certain factory buildings for the defendants, at Greensburg, Pa., the buildings to be…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION,
Mb. Chief Justice Paxson:
The first assignment is not in accordance with the Rules of Court, and will not be considered.
The second assignment alleges error in the admission of exhibits 3, 4, 5, and 6. They are alleged copies of letters ad*206dressed by plaintiffs to various persons. No. 3, dated July 11, 1888, was addressed to the defendants; No. 4, dated July 18, 1888, was addressed to Michael Trump, Esq., assistant superintendent of the railroad company; No. 5, dated September 10, 1888, was addressed to defendants’ solicitors; No. 6, dated October 24, 1888, was addressed to the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Fleishbein v. ThorneWashington Supreme Court · 1937
- Wahl v. State Workmen's Insurance FundSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Kann v. BennettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Huckestein v. Kelly & Jones Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Norbeck v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.