Cluck v. Lackey
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 228, Oct. T., 1921, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. No. 4, Phi la.. Co., Sept. T., 1920, No. 9026, on verdict for defendants in the case of Harry H. Cluck v. Leopold Lackey and Julia Lackey. Assumpsit for services rendered under a verbal contract. Before Audenried, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The jury found a verdict in favor of the defendants and judgment was entered thereon. Plaintiff appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 228, Oct. T., 1921, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. No. 4, Phi la.. Co., Sept. T., 1920, No. 9026, on verdict for defendants in the case of Harry H. Cluck v. Leopold Lackey and Julia Lackey. Assumpsit for services rendered under a verbal contract. Before Audenried, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The jury found a verdict in favor of the defendants and judgment was entered thereon. Plaintiff appealed. Errors assigned were various parts of the charge of the court, quoting it. The court erred in stating that the appellant can, on the same facts,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The plaintiff having chosen to bring a joint action against two defendants declared that his cause of action rested upon a breach by them of a joint undertaking entered into by both of them. The defendants were husband and wife and the undertaking set up by the plaintiff concerned extensive repairs to a dwelling house, the property of the defendant husband. Separate affidavits of defense were filed. The defendant wife, in her affidavit, averred she had never had any dealings of any kind with the plaintiff, that she was not the owner of the property upon which the work was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wiest v. Electric Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Dutton v. Lansdowne BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Moser v. Philadelphia, Harrisburg & Pittsburg RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- McQueen's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
3Cited by1 opinion
- Landis v. ShapleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922