Legal Opinion

Stern Company v. Paul

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 12, 1928No. Appeal 58PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Cunningham, J.,

The plaintiff corporation thought this action of replevin to recover possession of a diamond ring, delivered by it to Ben and Etta Paul, two of the defendants, under the terms of a certain written agreement, and pledged by them to the other defendants, trading as Rettew’s Money Loan Office. The owners of the money loan office filed a separate affidavit of defense averring, inter alia, that the writing under which the plaintiff delivered the ring to the Pauls is an agreement for a conditional sale of it to them, thereby bringing the transaction within the provisions of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Root v. Republic Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  2. Leitch v. Sanford Motor Truck Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Miller Piano Co. v. ParkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  4. Schmidt v. BaderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  5. Hoeveler-Stutz Co. v. Cleveland Motor SalesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. HartmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  3. S. F. Bowser & Co. v. Franklin Mortgage & Investment Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. National Bond & Investment Co. v. GillSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. Kindig v. Wertz, Admx.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

6 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