Frisbie v. McFarlane
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 253, Jan. T., 1899, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Bradford Co., Deo. T., 1893, No. 331, on certificate for defendants in case of Hiram Frisbie and Horace Kipp, trading as Hiram Frisbie & Co. v. ■James McFarlane, J. Thorne, Samuel Thorne, trading as James McFarlane & Co. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Lynch, P. J. The court charged as follows: [There are two vital questions in tins case, well worthy of •consideration by you.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 253, Jan. T., 1899, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Bradford Co., Deo. T., 1893, No. 331, on certificate for defendants in case of Hiram Frisbie and Horace Kipp, trading as Hiram Frisbie & Co. v. ■James McFarlane, J. Thorne, Samuel Thorne, trading as James McFarlane & Co. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Lynch, P. J. The court charged as follows: [There are two vital questions in tins case, well worthy of •consideration by you. The first question is, were these three Alleged firms, Hiram Frisbie & Co., G. W. Kipp & Co. and Kipp ■& Kizer, in fact, one and the same…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
This judgment must be reversed for wide departure from the ' verdict on which it was entered. Hiram Frisbie and Horace Kipp, trading as Hiram Frisbie & Co. brought suit against McFarlane & Co. and at the last trial the jury rendered a verdict for defendants with a certificate in their favor. The parties stood as above stated, the jury were sworn, and the verdict rendered, upon the record in that form. But without regard to all this, judgment was entered by precipe from counsel in *115favor of defendants against Horace Kipp, G. W. Kipp and E. F. Kizer trading as…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Chambers v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of Sapulpa v. YoungSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Becker v. Lebanon & Myerstown Street Railway Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904