Reisinger v. Magee
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 5, Oct, T., 1893, by defendants, E. Magee & Co., from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., June T., 1890, No. 840, on verdict for plaintiff, Clarence Reisinger. Assumpsit for balance of purchase money due on sale of lease. Appellant’s paper book did not contain the statement or plaintiff’s points.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 5, Oct, T., 1893, by defendants, E. Magee & Co., from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., June T., 1890, No. 840, on verdict for plaintiff, Clarence Reisinger. Assumpsit for balance of purchase money due on sale of lease. Appellant’s paper book did not contain the statement or plaintiff’s points. It also omitted the charge of the court in the order required by Rule 17. From plaintiff’s statement as printed in appellee’s paper book it appeared that plaintiff claimed to recover a balance due on sale of lease. A note for $600 had been given for the amount by Howard, an…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
In the preparation of their paper-book, defendants have neglected to comply with the rules of court in several particulars. For that reason alone plaintiff would be entitled to an affirmance of the judgment. But waiving that, there appears to be nothing in either of the specifications of error that would warrant a reversal. From the statement of claim, — supplied by the appellee, — and the charge of the learned trial judge, it appears that the suit is for balance purchase money due on sale of the coal yard lease referred to in the testimony. It also appears that said balance is…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Anstine v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Goodlatte v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceConnecticut Superior Court · 1967
- Prescott v. Williamsport & N. B. R. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1908
- Socha v. Metz, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1955