Diehl v. M'Glue
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. The defendant in error was plaintiff below. After argument by Keenile for the plaintiff in error, and Brewster for the defendant in error, the opinion of the court, (in which the point decided is fully stated) was delivered by
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
— The declaration is in assumpsit,'md. contained, ori*338ginally, the following counts: 1. A count for goods sold and delivered, with a quantum valebant. 2. A count for work and labour clone, with a quantum meruit. 3. A count for money had and received, and for money-paid, laid out and expended. 4. A common count, with an insimul computassent. On the trial, after the jury were sworn, and after the plaintiff's case was opened and some testimony given, the counsel for the plaintiff offered in evidence the deposition of Benjamin Gidding, which was objected to by the defendant's counsel, as…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cassell v. CookeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1822
- Newlin v. PalmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1824
- Cunningham v. DaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1815
- Gratz v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1809
- Rodrigue v. CurcierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bogart v. M'DonaldNew York Supreme Court · 1801
- Kester v. Stokes, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1835
- Lacroix v. Macquart, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1835
- Stewart v. KellySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851
- City of Louisville v. WehmhoffCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.