Silver v. Tomach
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 242, Oct. T., 1919, by plaintiff from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, April Term, 1916, No. 278, on verdict for defendant in the case of Joseph Silver v. Morris Tomach. Assumpsit on promissory notes. Before Crane, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The jury rendered a verdict for defendant and judgment was entered thereon. Plaintiff appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 242, Oct. T., 1919, by plaintiff from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, April Term, 1916, No. 278, on verdict for defendant in the case of Joseph Silver v. Morris Tomach. Assumpsit on promissory notes. Before Crane, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The jury rendered a verdict for defendant and judgment was entered thereon. Plaintiff appealed. Errors assigned were various rulings on evidence and answer to point as quoted in the opinion of the Superior Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
This suit is brought on three promissory notes payable to the New Raincoat Co., each dated November 3, 1913, and each in the sum of two hundred dollars. The notes were endorsed over to the plaintiff, Joseph Silver, after maturity. The defense is that the notes were paid to the New Raincoat Co., prior to their negotiation. This, of course, if supported by credible testimony would be a complete defense. The plaintiff in his reply avers that the checks given by the defendant were not applied to the notes but were appropriated by the Raincoat Co., to other purposes, and that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kann v. KannSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Harmony Creamery Co. v. BickertonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914