Legal Opinion

Mann v. Mt. Union Tanning & Extract Co.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 17, 1920No. 994Published

At Law. Assumpsit by Henry Mann, trading as H. Mann & Co., against the Mt. Union Tanning & Extract Company and another.

1Opinion of the Court

WITMER, District Judge.

This case is tried without jury by agreement of parties, as provided by Act April 22, 1874 (P. L. 109).

The plaintiff, Henry Mann, trading as H. Mann & Co., has brought this suit against the defendant, the Mt. Union Tanning & Extract Company, and H. Theodore Sorg, as trustee of Bothamley Chemical Color & Extract Company, Incorporated, bankrupt, to recover an alleged ballance due upon the purchase of certain logwood on a contract in writing consisting of certain letters and telegrams. The Bothamley Company, a dealer in logwood and extracts, wrote to Mann, an importer of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Olivier v. Mt. Union Tanning & Extract Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1920
  2. Green v. BoydSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
  3. Estate of the North American Land Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
  4. Hibbs v. RueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846

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

Powered by the Exa API