Guppy v. Moltrup
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Simpson,
Plaintiff sued to recover $64,260, with interest, because of defendant’s refusal to comply with his oral contract to purchase certain shares of corporate stock. To this demand the latter pleaded that the action was within the purview of section 4 of the Uniform Sales Act of May 19, 1915, P. L. 543, and hence no recovery could be had, since the statement of claim did not set forth any of the circumstances which, under that section, would make the contract enforceable, as, in Mason-Heflin Coal Co. v. Currie, 270 Pa. 221, we said was necessary. The court below…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mason-Heflin Coal Co. v. CurrieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Provident Life & Trust Co. v. HammondSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Spangler's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- People's Bank v. KurtzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
3Cited by29 opinions
- Commonwealth v. StofchekSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Zamore v. WhittenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
- Phillips's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Vitro Manufacturing Co. v. Standard Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Roberts v. CauffielSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.