Legal Opinion

Vahlsing v. H. Rothstein & Sons

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 5, 1932No. Appeal 71PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

This action of assumpsit arose out of the sale of three cars of carrots by defendants to plaintiff. The sale was made through J. B. White, a broker. The plaintiff paid for the first two cars, before he discovered that they were not U. S. No. 1 grade, as they had been represented to him by White. He sold them in the open market and sued defendant for the difference between what he paid for them and what they brought. Defendants denied that they had agreed to sell U. S. No. 1 grade carrots, and presented a counterclaim for the damages suffered by them by reason of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Isaac v. Donegal & Conoy Mutual Fire Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  2. Bunting v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  3. C. Clothier Jones v. AdamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  4. Robert J. & R. Ritchie Co. v. Albion Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Stern v. DekelbaumSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Commonwealth v. RoutleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. Squire v. Merchants' Warehouse Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  4. Leland v. Firemen's Insurance Co. of NewarkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API