Legal Opinion · Dissent

Barium Steel Corp. v. Wiley

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 28, 1954No. Appeals, 254, 255 and 268Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Me. Justice Jones:

The basic question in this case is whether, under a written agreement between Barium Steel Corporation, the plaintiff, and the defendants Wiley for the sale of certain shares of stock by the latter to the former, Barium has a right of action for the recovery of an expense allegedly sustained by Barium’s corporate sub-subsidiary Avhich was not in existence when the agreement was entered into, was not mentioned or even anticipated therein and, unquestionably, did not qualify as a third party beneficiary of the contract. The learned court below allowed…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. SPIRES Et Ux. v. Hanover Fire Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Waring v. WDAS Broadcasting Station, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  3. Tucker v. BinenstockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  4. McCarthy v. FerenceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  5. Homestead Borough v. Defense Plant Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947

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

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

Powered by the Exa API