Miller ex rel. Second National Bank v. Seaman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 76, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lycoming Co., Dec. T., 1894, No. 175, of nonsuit. Assumpsit for lumber sold by contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 76, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lycoming Co., Dec. T., 1894, No. 175, of nonsuit. Assumpsit for lumber sold by contract. Before Metzger, P. J. The plaintiff offered in evidence the following agreement for the sale of lumber: “ By this agreement, made this twenty-first day of February, 1894, A. G. Miller, of Elmira, N. Y., agrees to sell to S. A. Seaman & Co. and J. A. Smyth, of Williamsport, Pa., the 406,000 feet of hemlock lumber, more or less, belonging to the said A. G. Miller, now piled on the yard of the Dent Lumber Company at Du Boistown, Lycoming…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Williams,
In the spring of 1894 a quantity of sawed, hemlock lumber was swept from the yard, of the Dent Lumber Company at Du Boistown, near Williamsport, by flood and lost. The object of this action is to determine whether the plaintiff or the defendants must bear the loss so occasioned, and this must depend on which of them held the title at the time the flood came. The hemlock had been sawed by the Dent Lumber Company in 1898, and at that time belonged to it. On the 8th day of November of that year, the Dent Lumber Company sold to A. G. Miller, the legal plaintiff,…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Elliott v. HowisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
- Vogt v. SchienebeckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Dannemiller v. KirkpatrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Sempel v. Northern Hardwood Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Hunter Bros. Milling Co. v. Kramer Bros.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1905
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.