Legal Opinion · Dissent

Scull v. Reiley

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 3, 1940No. Appeal, 144Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Maxey :

I agree with the majority opinion that “where an agreement is drawn in the alternative and gives the lessor, or seller under a conditional sales contract, the right either to repossess the property upon default, or to collect the rental, or the unpaid purchase price, such lessor, or seller, can either collect the amount due under the terms of the agreement in affirmance thereof, or rescind the contract and repossess the property, but he cannot do both” (citing cases). I also agree, as stated by the majority opinion: “It is equally well established . . .…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Seanor & Bierer v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  2. Catawissa Railroad v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  3. Kelley Springfield Road Roller Co. v. SchlimmeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  4. Hollenback Coal Co. v. Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
  5. Auto Security Co. v. CanelliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API