Ludwig v. Meyre
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Berks county. The facts of the case and points are fully stated in the opinion of this court. argued that the assignment of the claim was an implied warranty that the debt was due, and therefore the witness was interested until he was released from it; which he was not by the one in evidence. 5 Whart. 446; 2 Watts 121; 8 Watts 46; 5 Watts 80; 3 Watts Sf Serg. 55; 9 Watts 183. contended that the witness had disposed of all interest before the…
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Berks county. The facts of the case and points are fully stated in the opinion of this court. argued that the assignment of the claim was an implied warranty that the debt was due, and therefore the witness was interested until he was released from it; which he was not by the one in evidence. 5 Whart. 446; 2 Watts 121; 8 Watts 46; 5 Watts 80; 3 Watts Sf Serg. 55; 9 Watts 183. contended that the witness had disposed of all interest before the institution of the suit, and that the release in evidence discharged him from any supposed liability on his implied…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Kennedy, J.
This suit was brought in the name of J. Henry Meyre for the use of Augustus H. Raiguel against the plaintiff in error, Jacob D. Ludwig, to recover the value of 300 dozen of black cotton wadding, and the like quantity of white cotton wadding, which, as the plaintiff alleged, the defendant below undertook to carry from the borough of Reading, in that county, to the city of Philadelphia, and deliver the same to Elisha Wells and William Raiguel: but ifastead of delivering the wadding to these last-named persons, delivered it to Charles A. and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Fowler v. DavenportTexas Supreme Court · 1858
- Bank of Kentucky v. Schuylkill Bank, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1846
- Morgan v. DibbleTexas Supreme Court · 1867
- Search's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850