Legal Opinion
Farnham Co. v. Southeastern Const. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
Decided April 19, 1906No. 58PublishedCited by 1 opinion
On Motion for Judgment for Want of Sufficient Affidavit of Defense.
1Opinion of the Court
J. B. McPHKRSON, District Judge.
The execution of the written contract upon which this suit is brought is not denied, neither is the correctness of the specifications that are made a part of that agreement. It is also conceded, or at all events it is not disputed, that the amount of money claimed by the plaintiff is due and owing by the defendant under the provisions of the contract. The only defense set up by the affidavit is that there was an oral term of the contract, which is thus set out in the, affidavit of defense:
“In consideration of these undertakings by the defendant, the plaintiff…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Brown v. SpoffordSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Richardson v. HardwickSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Phillips v. MeilySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Bast v. BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Erie City v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Southern Const. Co. v. Farnham Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1906