Draucker v. Arick
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 78, July T., 1893, by George Arick, one of the defendants, from judgment of C. P. Clearfield Co., Dec. T., 1892, No. 348, on verdict for plaintiffs, A. M. and P. W. Draucker against Geo. Arick and J. Scott Flegal. Assumpsit for money loaned.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 78, July T., 1893, by George Arick, one of the defendants, from judgment of C. P. Clearfield Co., Dec. T., 1892, No. 348, on verdict for plaintiffs, A. M. and P. W. Draucker against Geo. Arick and J. Scott Flegal. Assumpsit for money loaned. Before Krebs, P. J. The court charged in part as follows: “ It seems from the evidence that some time about May 8, 1891, the two plaintiffs, with George Arick and John Hayes, entered into an arrangement with Hoover, Hughes & Co. for stocking some timber upon certain lands in this county. It is not material what these arrangements were, or what…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This suit was brought to recover two hundred and sixty-one ^ dollars, with interest, being balance of money alleged to have been loaned to the defendants, Arick and Flegal. The testimony introduced by plaintiffs tended to sustain their contention, and thus it became a question of fact for the jury; and to them the case was fairly submitted with proper instructions.
Defendants’ points for charge, recited in the first and second specifications of error, are each predicated of an erroneous assumption of facts; and for that reason they were rightly refused. There was testimony tending…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Goldberg v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Beaumont v. SharplessSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Farrell v. YoungSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Kish v. DaumSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928