Haverly v. Mercur
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Bradford county; Of January Term 1874, No. 210. This was an action of assumpsit, brought November 7th 1870, by Amasa Haverly against Mahlon C. Mercur.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Bradford county; Of January Term 1874, No. 210. This was an action of assumpsit, brought November 7th 1870, by Amasa Haverly against Mahlon C. Mercur. The plaintiff’s claim was as follows :— The firm of Whittenhall & Co., composed of Whittenhall and Andrews, were contractors to build the Sullivan and Erie Railroad, in the counties of Sullivan and Bradford; the defendant was president of the railroad company; the plaintiff was a sub-contractor for the construction of two sections of the road. His allegation was that Whittenhall & Co. had not paid him the…
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment was entered in Supreme Court March 22d, 1875,
2Per curiam
It was held at Harrisburg last year, in the case of Eshelman & Herr v. Beecher & Harnish, 26 P. F. Smith 97, that the evidence to change an existing contract relation between the plaintiff’ and a third party, and to prove a promise by the defendant to pay the debt of another, as a new and original undertaking, and not a contract of suretyship, must be clear and satisfactory ; otherwise, the case will fall within the operation of the Statute of Frauds, requiring the promise to be in writing. This is a wholesome rule, without which the…
3Cited by17 opinions
- Miller v. HurstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Kukich v. Serbian Eastern Orthodox ChurchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Murphy, P. v. International Druidic SocietySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Speers v. KnarrSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Bausbach v. ReiffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.