Rumsey v. Shaw
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 18, Oct T., 1903, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Lancaster Co., April T., 1901, No. 2, on verdict for plaintiff in case of George E. Rumsey v. P. B. Shaw. Assumpsit to recover the balance of purchase money of an option.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 18, Oct T., 1903, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Lancaster Co., April T., 1901, No. 2, on verdict for plaintiff in case of George E. Rumsey v. P. B. Shaw. Assumpsit to recover the balance of purchase money of an option. Before Landis, J. [If, however, from his own inspection of the plant prior to November 13, or from the information conveyed to him by Mr. Kinter, he had full knowledge concerning the plant including its income, he could not make this defense to this action, for then at the time he obtained the option from Rumsey he would not have given the note on the faith…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Pobtek, J.,
The plaintiff being the owner of an option to purchase all the stock of the Martinsburg Electric Company, of Marfcinsburg, W. Va., at the price of #50,000, which option expired on November 14, 1899, employed one Wilbur to assist him in making a sale of the option. Wilbur presented the matter to the defendant and, after some preliminary negotiations, the parties, plaintiff, defendant and Wilbur, met at Martinsburg on November 13, 1899. The defendant found that the extent and physical condition of the property of the electric company was as it had been represented to be,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Blygh v. SamsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Babcock v. CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Beetem's Administrators v. BurkholderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- Cornelius v. The BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Paul v. KunzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.