Legal Opinion

Croman v. Stull

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 27, 1888No. 280PublishedCited by 5 opinions

EBBOR TO THE COUNT OE COMMON PLEAS OE BUCKS COUNTY,; No. 280 January Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 28 September Term 1886, C. P. About June 20,1886, Reuben S. Stull, administrator d. b. n. c. t. a. of David D. Diehl deceased, brought assumpsit against Henry R. Croman, John Croman and David T. Breisch, to recover upon a promissory note made by the defendants, dated April 5, 1877, at one year, for $500, to order of David D. Diehl..

Read the full summary

EBBOR TO THE COUNT OE COMMON PLEAS OE BUCKS COUNTY,; No. 280 January Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 28 September Term 1886, C. P. About June 20,1886, Reuben S. Stull, administrator d. b. n. c. t. a. of David D. Diehl deceased, brought assumpsit against Henry R. Croman, John Croman and David T. Breisch, to recover upon a promissory note made by the defendants, dated April 5, 1877, at one year, for $500, to order of David D. Diehl.. The defendants severally pleaded, payment with leave, etc., and subsequently John Croman and David T. Breisch pleaded non assumpsit infra sex annos. At the…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion,

Mr. Justice Paxson :

This record presents but two questions, viz: (a) whether the promise was made to the proper person, and (&) if so, whether it was sufficiently distinct to take the case out of the statute of limitations.

It is settled law that the promise must be made to the plaintiff or his authorized agent. A promise made to a stranger who has no interest in the transaction does not bind the promising party. Gillingham v. Gillingham, 17 Pa. 302; Kyle v. Wells, 17 Pa. 286; McKinney v. Snyder, 78 Pa. 497. The rule that the promise must be made to the plaintiff or his agent means…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kyle v. WellsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851
  2. McKinney v. SnyderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875
  3. Gillingham v. GillinghamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Spangler v. SpanglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  2. Peters v. RothermelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  3. Jones v. MillerTennessee Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Kehrer v. WeismuellerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  5. Peters v. RothermelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API