Bickham v. Smith
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
■May 11th 1869. Before Thompson, C., J., Read, Agnew and Sharswood, JJ. Williams, J., absent. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster county: No. 21, to May Term 1869. This was an action of assumpsit brought, February 22d 1866, by A. Herr Smith, Esq., against Stephen Gr. Bickham and Sarah Bickham, trustees. The plaintiff declared in several counts, for services as an attorney at law on special contract, — and on a quantum meruit.
Read the full summary
■May 11th 1869. Before Thompson, C., J., Read, Agnew and Sharswood, JJ. Williams, J., absent. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster county: No. 21, to May Term 1869. This was an action of assumpsit brought, February 22d 1866, by A. Herr Smith, Esq., against Stephen Gr. Bickham and Sarah Bickham, trustees. The plaintiff declared in several counts, for services as an attorney at law on special contract, — and on a quantum meruit. Eugenia R. Bickham, on the 80th of September 1838, conveyed all her estate to the defendants on certain trusts named in the deed. S. Gr. Bickham was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered,
by Thompson, C. J.
The jury found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and undertook to direct how it should be paid. This was surplusage only and did not vitiate the verdict. The court very properly disregarded it and entered judgment on the verdict: 1 Watts 259 ; 8 S. & R. 441; 4 B. Munroe 7.
There was nothing in the testimony to sustain the apportionment attempted. The proof applied to services in favor of the defend*47ants jointly. It is true, in rendering services in that matter, the case of lunacy against Bickham, was often under consideration, for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fisher v. KeanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smullin v. HarenskiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Commonwealth v. CarlSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925