Haupt v. Unger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 92, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Cambria Co., March T., 1905, No. 3, dismissing bill in equity in case of Herman Haupt and George B. Stineman v. David E. Unger and Catherine M. Unger. Bill in equity for specific performance. Before O’Con-nor, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was decree dismissing the bill.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Brown,
Nothing could be clearer than that one of these appellees, aided by the other, his wife, has most unconscionably attempted to avoid performance of his agreement with the appellants, and he would succeed but for the decree that has awaited him here since we heard this appeal. On February 23, 1901, David E. Unger, of Croyle township, Cambria county, this state,, entered into an agreement, in writing, with the appellants, the material portion of which is as follows: “For and in consideration of the sum of twenty five ($25) dollars in hand paid, the receipt of which is…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ranney v. ByersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Olinger v. ShultzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Dumbach v. BishopSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Ross v. BakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
3Cited by7 opinions
- Suchan Et Ux. v. SwopeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Schaeffer v. ColdrenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- O'Connell v. CeaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Albert v. Schenley Auto Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Bridgeford v. Groh Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.