Greenwald & Co. v. Kaster
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, No. 3; of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1877, No. 206. This was a feigned issue, ordered upon the opening of a judgment which had been obtained by Greenwald & Co. against Lazarus H. Kaster, in assumpsit, for goods sold and delivered. Defendant pleaded payment. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of this court.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Trunkey
Lazarus PI. Easter and Joseph Eckhcuse, late partners, doing business in the state of Indiana, contracted a debt for goods, purchased of E. Greenwald & Co., in Philadelphia. In the action brought for recovery of that debt, judgment was taken against Easter for want of appearance. The summons was returned “nihil habet” as to Eckhouse. Afterwards suit was brought against Eckhouse in Indiana. The plaintiffs, by their attorneys in fact, on the *474th February 1875, in consideration of $700 paid by Eckhouse, released all rights of action against him, and surrendered all claims on account of…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Joseph Melnick Building & Loan Ass'n v. MelnickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Louis Bittner v. Vera Mary Little and Harry LittleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
- Anthony P. Miller, Inc. v. NeedhamCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
- The AdourDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1927
- Preine v. FreemanDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1953
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.