Brady v. Kern
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
At . Law. Assumpsit by Arthur C. Brady against Martin E. Kern. On motion for a new trial. Verdict for defendant. Plaintiff’s motion fpr new trial denied, and leave granted defendant to move for judgment on the verdict.
1Opinion of the Court
DICKINSON, District Judge.
The verdict was for the defendant. There is only one question left in the cause. It is purely an appellate one, and is decisive of the case. What it is and how it arose may be best shown by contrasting the plaintiff’s case with the defense. A general statement of the issue between the parties is this:
The plaintiff claimed $131,188.50 loss on sale of stock which 'defendant had agreed to buy of plaintiff for $131,500, less $100 paid on account, and the sale of which netted $211.50. The defense was that the purchase was conditional; the true version of the facts being…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Burke v. DulaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Ware v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Tug River Coal & Salt Co. v. BrigelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brown v. CabellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1931
- Brady v. KernCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1915
- Powers v. Maryland Casualty Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1928
- Atlas Petroleum Co. v. CocklinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
- Live Stock State Bank v. MaupinSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929