Legal Opinion

Gehres v. Crawford

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 9, 1887No. 76, E. DPublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to tbe Common Pleas of Northumberland County to review a judgment on a verdict for the defendant in a feigned issue.

Read the full summary

Error to tbe Common Pleas of Northumberland County to review a judgment on a verdict for the defendant in a feigned issue. This was a feigned -issue to try the question: “Whether at the time of the purchase of J. W. Crawford’s stock of boots, shoes, etc., in his store at Shamokin, Pennsylvania, by George E. Gehres, it wras agreed that an account of the stock should be taken, and a discount of 10 per cent at least should be allowed by the said Crawford on the amount of the inventory; and if so, whether the amount of said discount was not deducted, but was included in the sum of $7,500, the…

1Per curiam

The court committed no error in the rejection of evidence. All the evidence received was insufficient to reform the written instrument. The court therefore was clearly right in giving binding instructions to the jury to find for the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Waldo & Hughes v. BellSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1858

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API