Legal Opinion
Lukens v. Crozier
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided December 11, 1924No. Appeal, 231PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The following extracts from the opinion filed by President Judge Audenried, of the court below, upon overruling defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto, properly dispose of all the questions involved in this appeal.
“The first question to be decided is whether the defendant is under any liability whatever to the plaintiff in this matter. There can be no doubt that C’rozier sent to Lukens the order on the strength of which the latter shipped the pipe in question. In sending this order he must have acted either on his own behalf, or as agent for Lukens, or as agent for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wolff v. WilsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Hopkins v. EverlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Stiteler v. DitzenbergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ashland Towson Corp. v. KasunicSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Cervitor Kitchens, Inc. v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972
- Kennedy v. FaushSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- Cervitor Kitchens, Inc. v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972