Hoge v. Rush
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 168, Oct. T., 1895, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny County, Aug. T., 1891, No. 168, on verdict for plaintiffs. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before Porter, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 168, Oct. T., 1895, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny County, Aug. T., 1891, No. 168, on verdict for plaintiffs. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before Porter, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. The court charged in part as follows: [There is, gentlemen, in the case, evidence, the weight of which, if it were of any avail, would be for you, that Mr. Rush made payments to Mr. Lantz after these cattle had passed into their possession. He claims that those payments were made because he bought the individual half for $3,500, and that…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Dean,
The Huffman Farm Company, plaintiff, was a partnership organized in 1884, in Greene county, Pennsylvania, to carry on the business of farming and stock raising in Nebraska; they then purchased land in the last named state, and cattle wherewith to stock it; the partners were six in number, among them William T. Lantz, who was cashier of a bank in Waynesburg, Greene county. In July, 1885, John R. Rush had a bill of $650 against the partnership for feeding the cattle the first winter; for this, he was pressing Lantz, who seemed to be the active member of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bowman's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
3Cited by1 opinion
- Greco v. ChristineLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1920