Boyd v. Gordon
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. IN this suit, which was-brought by the defendant in 7 r -r error, mthe Common Pleas ot Lancaster county, to recover the price of a quantity of lumber sold to the plaintiff in error, the following statement was filed. w “ On the 20th June, 1811, the plaintiff sold lumber to the defendant, for which the defendant agreed to pay him, * u * <• hundred and six dollars.
Read the full summary
In Error. IN this suit, which was-brought by the defendant in 7 r -r error, mthe Common Pleas ot Lancaster county, to recover the price of a quantity of lumber sold to the plaintiff in error, the following statement was filed. w “ On the 20th June, 1811, the plaintiff sold lumber to the defendant, for which the defendant agreed to pay him, * u * <• hundred and six dollars. The defendant afterwards gave the plaintiff a note on John Campbell, for the delivery 12,000 feet of white pine boards, on the express condition, that if the plaintiff should not be able to find Campbell, when he went up…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson J.
The principal exception here is that there is no allegation, that the note was returned to the defendant below before the suit was brought.. The cause of action was the original price of the articles sold, and that was not released by the acceptance of the note, which could not, before it produced the money, be considered as payment. It was therefore unnecessary, in the statement, to say any thing about the agreement concerning the note, which was a distinct matter, and an immaterial part of the case. If the arrangement had produced payment of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Riddle v. StevensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1816
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lomis v. RuetterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Sidwell v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1830
- Snevely v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840