Clements v. Bolster
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 114, Oct. T., 1897, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., Dee. T., 1894, No. 24, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before Livingston, P. J. It appears from the record that plaintiff based his claim on an alleged epistolary contract for the purchase and sale of a monument.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 114, Oct. T., 1897, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., Dee. T., 1894, No. 24, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before Livingston, P. J. It appears from the record that plaintiff based his claim on an alleged epistolary contract for the purchase and sale of a monument. In his statement the plaintiff declared on two letters of the dates of January 23, 1894 and January 24, 1894, as forming the basis of this contract. These letters are. set out in full in the opinion of the court. Other letters of subsequent date passing between the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
The declaration avers, as the cause of action, a contract between the parties, embodied in a letter from the defendants to the plaintiff, dated January 23, 1894, and an answer by the *416plaintiff, elated January 24, 1894. The trial judge held that these letters formed “ a complete contract for the purchase and sale of the monument ” to which they referred. This instruction to the jury is, inter alia, assigned for error. Unless, therefore, the letters present such a contract, the declaration discloses no ground on which the plaintiff can recover, and the instruction complained…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway v. Columbus Rolling MillSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Centenary M. E. Church v. ClimeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
- Joseph v. RichardsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Slaymaker v. IrwinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- McDonough v. Jolly Bros.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Swing v. WalkerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Cosgrove v. WoodwardSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Alexanian v. Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Leo P. Rich v. G.W. Pifer SonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Keiser v. Reading Suburban Real Estate Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.