Legal Opinion

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Dutton

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 16, 1964No. Appeal, No. 128PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Flood, J.,

The plaintiff sought to replevy a stereo and television set which it had sold to the defendant Dutton on a bailment lease. The complaint averred that at the time of the sale Dutton lived at 1416 Laurel Drive, *6Pittsburgh, that without notice to or consent of the plaintiff, Dutton moved from the premises taking the equipment with him, and that there is still the sum of $468 due which Dutton has refused to pay, as a result of which the title and right of immediate possession under the agreement of sale are in the plaintiff. These averments are admitted in the answer except as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Matter of Einhorn Bros., Inc., Bankrupt. Textile Banking Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
  2. Reinhart v. GerhardtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  3. Frazee v. MorrisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Gross v. FoxDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Universal CIT Credit Corporation v. Congressional Motors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
  3. Xerox Corp. v. Hende-Jon Furniture Showrooms, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1976

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

Powered by the Exa API