Ivery v. Phillips
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 109, Jan. T., 1900, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Cumberland Co., Nov. T., 1898, No. 52, on verdict for defendant in case of John W. Ivery v. M. W. Phillips. Assumpsit to recover an interest in a clay lease. Before E. W. Biddle, P. J. At the trial it appeared that M. W. Phillips owned a clay lease on the lands of J. C. Lehman.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 109, Jan. T., 1900, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Cumberland Co., Nov. T., 1898, No. 52, on verdict for defendant in case of John W. Ivery v. M. W. Phillips. Assumpsit to recover an interest in a clay lease. Before E. W. Biddle, P. J. At the trial it appeared that M. W. Phillips owned a clay lease on the lands of J. C. Lehman. On March 2,1895, the plaintiff and. defendant entered into an agreement in writing,' by which Ivery became the superintendent of the clay works at a salary of one fifth of the difference between the gross receipts and the gross expenses, provided that…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
There is not a particle of merit in the claim of the plaintiff in this case. The relations between himself and the defendant were carefully prescribed in the written and sealed agreement made between them on March 2, 1895, and in that agreement it was most positively provided that nothing therein contained should “ be construed to vest in Ivery any interest, right, claim or demand in the clay lease or operation whatsoever, the relation between the said M. W. Phillips and the said J. W. Ivery being merely that of employer and employee.” It is not pretended that any interest in the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ogden v. Philadelphia & West Chester Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Stitzel v. FredericiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929