Robinson v. Goldberg
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Linn,
“The case turns,” as the learned chancellor said, “upon a single issue of fact, namely, whether the partnership was composed of all three parties to the bill, or only of the two defendants.” It was a joint venture in a single transaction—tbe purchase of a going business with the object of selling it at a profit. He found that the plaintiff and both defendants were equally interested and decreed accordingly. One of defendants, Goldberg, appeals. In opposing the position taken by Goldberg on the evidence, the plaintiff-appellee points to the findings of fact, affirmed…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Belmont Laboratories, Inc. v. HeistSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Comstock v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Frazier v. MansfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Dempster v. BaxmyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Valley Smokeless Coal Co. v. Manufacturers' Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
3Cited by9 opinions
- Holst v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Goldberg v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Vercesi v. PetriSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- McLaughlin v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Dales v. MuirSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.