Hoover v. Jackson
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 191, Oct. T., 1912, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., June T., 1907, .No. 532, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Maurice J. Hoover v. Joseph T. Jackson et al., trading as J. T. Jackson & Company. Assumpsit for salary. Before Audenried, J. At the trial the court entered a compulsory nonsuit.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 191, Oct. T., 1912, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., June T., 1907, .No. 532, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Maurice J. Hoover v. Joseph T. Jackson et al., trading as J. T. Jackson & Company. Assumpsit for salary. Before Audenried, J. At the trial the court entered a compulsory nonsuit. Subsequently Audenried, J., filed the following opinion: Hoover claims from J. T. Jackson & Company $522 for three months’ and four days7 salary as manager of their Oak Lane real estate office, and $41.03 for money advanced on their account by way of office expenses, in…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mobbison, J.,
In this action of assumpsit, when the plaintiff rested his case, the learned trial judge entered a compulsory nonsuit- and, subsequently, the court refused to take it off and the plaintiff excepted and appealed to this court.
We have given the assignments of error and the argument of appellant’s learned counsel careful consideration and have reached the conclusion that the evidence offered and received and that offered and rejected did not present a case for the jury. We think the opinion 6f Audenbied, Judge, in refusing to take off the compulsory nonsuit, sufficiently…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Interstate Hosts, Inc. v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1968