Finkelstein v. Spatt
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 1,163, March T., 1912, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lackawanna Co., March T., 1908, No. 1,163, dismissing exceptions to report of referee in case of M. Finkelstein & Sons v. Harry Spatt. Exceptions to report of C. B. Gardner, Esq., referee. Before O’Neill, J. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was in dismissing exceptions to report of referee.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
This action was assumpsit to recover the price of clothing for which the defendant, a retail merchant doing *294business in Olyphant, Pennsylvania, gave the plaintiffs, .manufacturing dealers in New York city, an order, and which the defendant refused to accept from the railroad company on their arrival at Olyphant, but did not return to plaintiffs. The principal defense set up on the trial before the referee, who was appointed under the local Act of April 6, 1869, P. L. 725, and its supplements (4 Stew. P. D. 4069, note e.), was that the package was wrongly marked by…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dannemiller v. KirkpatrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Kroegher v. McConway & Torley Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Kirchner v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Elder Township School District v. Pennsylvania RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Philadelphia Co. v. United Gas Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Howard v. SiegelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Glou v. Security Benefit Ass'nSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Moldawer v. Trust Co. of North AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- In re Hoover & Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1930