Campbell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Failure to return consideration is not material for (a) the minor never received any consideration, (b) the minor is without funds to restore any consideration the mother received: Hinely v. Margaritz, 3 Pa. 428. The contract was void because it was an infant’s contract and there was a partial failure of consideration and hence no satisfaction of the accord. Brown defaulted in his payments. There was no accord and satisfaction.
Read the full summary
Failure to return consideration is not material for (a) the minor never received any consideration, (b) the minor is without funds to restore any consideration the mother received: Hinely v. Margaritz, 3 Pa. 428. The contract was void because it was an infant’s contract and there was a partial failure of consideration and hence no satisfaction of the accord. Brown defaulted in his payments. There was no accord and satisfaction. The notes given by Brown were not accepted in satisfaction. Failure to return the consideration is immaterial: Ruchizky v. DeHaven, 97 Pa. 202; Hollinger v. Ry., 225…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Drew,
The question here is the right of plaintiff to retain her verdict. She was seriously injured on September 7, 1927, when struck by an automobile owned and operated by James H. Brown, an employee of the defendant. Judgment having been entered on the verdict, defendant appealed, assigning as error the lower court’s refusal of its motion for judgment n. o. v.
At the trial defendant attempted to establish two defenses : that Brown was not, at the time of the accident, under’its. control so as to make it. liable for Ms negligence, and that, because of a release given to…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- International Text Book Co. v. . ConnellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Hollinger v. York Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Cain v. GarnerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- Mestetzko v. Elf Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1929
- Brownell v. AdamsNebraska Supreme Court · 1931
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Shumate v. Twin Tier Hospitality, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
- Gail Esther Frank, a Minor by Her Parents and Guardian, Shirley J. Frank v. Volkswagenwerk, A. G. Of West Germany v. Rosaria Ann Muckin and Donald P. Miller, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Haines v. FitzgeraldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Frank v. Volkswagenwerk, A. G.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Capetola v. OrlandoDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1978
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.