Legal Opinion

Huessener v. Fishel & Marks Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 16, 1924No. Appeal, 51PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Schaerer,

This was an action to recover the loss resulting from defendant’s refusal to comply with the terms of its contract to purchase from plaintiff 41 tons of steel sheets known as “cold rolled full finish black sheets,” part of an entire contract for the furnishing of 209 tons of the material, the balance of which had been received and paid for by defendant. The verdict was in plaintiff’s favor and from the judgment thereon defendant has appealed.

The contract was a parol one partly evidenced by a letter from defendant to plaintiff, which stated: “We confirm purchase…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. HowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Gossman v. RosenbergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
  3. Barber Milling Co. v. Leichthammer Baking Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  4. Kalin & Feldman, Inc. v. HerbertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. California Fruit Exchange v. HenryDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Price v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1930
  3. Atlantic City Tire & Rubber Corp. v. Southwark Foundry & MacHine Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Clavan v. HermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  5. C. D. Brown Co., Inc. v. Stand. H. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API