Trexler v. Reynolds
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 97, Oct. T., 1909, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Huntingdon Co., Dec. T., 1905, No. 172, on verdict for defendant in case of J. F. Trexler and J. L. Trexler v. H. P. Reynolds. Feigned issue to determine the ownership of certain corporate property. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict for defendant. Plaintiffs appealed. Errors assigned were (1-91) various rulings on evidence and instructions.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
Although the record before us is somewhat voluminous and the assignments of error numerous, the controlling question in the case lies within a narrow compass.
In the year 1904 the two plaintiffs and the defendant constituted a partnership doing business in Huntington county under the firm name and style of Trexler Bros. & Co. The business in which they were engaged was farming and dealing in five stock, both horses and cattle. The firm, or the members composing it, owned a large tract of land of nearly 5,000 acres and much personal property consisting of valuable horses,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Irvin v. Irvin, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Clearfield County1891
- Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Braddock Wire Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Barnhart v. RiddleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
- Williamson v. McClureSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Wright v. Monongahela Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ramble v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Pollow v. Henry L. Doherty & Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1930
- Trexler v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911