Legal Opinion

J. Hartman Co. v. Hyman

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County

Decided May 8, 1925No. 343PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Stern, P. J.,

The defendants are among 137 wholesale produce jobbers who are members of the Philadelphia Produce Credit and Collection Bureau. The by-laws of the bureau provide that every bill for fresh fruits and vegetables is due and payable on the Saturday after the sale shall have been made, and that if the bill is not paid by the purchaser by the Wednesday following such Saturday, the creditor, who is a member of the bureau, must report that fact to the bureau. If he fails to do so, he is subject to a fine. The by-laws further provide that the members are bound to refuse to sell on credit…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Woodhouse v. PowlesWashington Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Muetze v. TuteurWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Weston v. BarnicoatMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
  4. McIntyre v. WeinertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
  5. Reynolds v. Plumbers' Material Protective Ass'nNew York Supreme Court · 1900

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hartman v. Hyman & LiebermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API