Kime v. Tobyhanna Creek Ice Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 20, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Sept. T., 1908, No. 1356, for defendant n. o. v. in case of Bert Kime v. Tobybanna Creek Ice Co. Assumpsit to recover damages for breach of written contract. Before A. W. Johnson, P. J., specially presiding. The opinion of tbe. Supreme Court states the facts. Verdict for plaintiff for $4,368.99. The court subsequently on motion entered judgment for defendant n. o. v. Plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Elkin,
We agree with learned counsel for appellant that the contract relied on to sustain a recovery in the present case could be renewed by parol. Nothing contained in the contract required the renewal to be in writing, and even if the contract did so provide, it would not necessarily follow that the writing should be of such a character as to make the agreement a specialty and not one *64by parol. In this connection it is pertinent to remark that the word parol is used to distinguish contracts which are made verbally, or in writing not under seal, from those which are…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wenclawiak v. Sieracki Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Coane's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1932