Comly v. Linton
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 217, Oct. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of Municipal Court, Phila. Co., March T., 1914, No. 371, on judgment for plaintiff on case tried without a jury in suit of Daniel F. Comly, trading as Wm. F. Comly- & Son, to use of Glauzer Brothers v. Amon Linton. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Knowles, J., without a jury. At the trial judgment was entered for plaintiff for $334.50. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 217, Oct. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of Municipal Court, Phila. Co., March T., 1914, No. 371, on judgment for plaintiff on case tried without a jury in suit of Daniel F. Comly, trading as Wm. F. Comly- & Son, to use of Glauzer Brothers v. Amon Linton. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Knowles, J., without a jury. At the trial judgment was entered for plaintiff for $334.50. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were as follows; 1. The learned trial judge erred in entering a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. 2. The learned trial judge erred in not entering a…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
This was an action of assumpsit to recover the difference between the amount bid by the defendant at an auction sale for a lot of cherries and the amount received on a resale, the defendant having refused to accept them. The case was tried before the court without a jury. No requests or points for special or general findings, either of fact or law, were presented, and no exception was taken to the judgment.
For the reasons stated in Philadelphia and Gulf Steamship Company, etc., v. Clark, in which we herewith file an opinion, the third and fourth assignments of error are…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Philadelphia & Gulf Steamship Co. v. SoeffingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916