Prouty v. Kreamer
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 86, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Clinton Co., May T., 1898, No. 107, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Chester Prouty v. Charles Kreamer. Assumpsit on a contract for the sale and delivery of logs. Before Mayer, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was refusal to take off nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mestbezat,
By an agreement under seal, dated November 6, 1885, the plaintiff sold to the defendant certain logs which were to be delivered in the boom at Williamsport or Lock Haven as defendant might prefer, in the spring of 1886. The price was to be paid in instalments when the “ logs were delivered in accordance with the agreement and scaled straight and sound from the Williamsport and Lock Haven booms.” The logs were to be scaled on the bank by a man paid by the plaintiff and as they were taken from the boom, by a man paid by the defendant.
This action was brought…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ellmaker v. Franklin Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
- Lawall v. RaderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1855
3Cited by5 opinions
- Robert Grace Contracting Co. v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Stucker v. ShumakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Irwin Glass Co. v. BuchananCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1923
- Novice v. AlterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Roddy Realty, Inc. v. Cadillac Real Estate Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County1966