Gill v. Johnstown Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 173, Oct T., 1892, by John L. Gill, plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Cambria Co., June T., 1891, No. 471, on verdict for defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 173, Oct T., 1892, by John L. Gill, plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Cambria Co., June T., 1891, No. 471, on verdict for defendant. Assumpsit for driving lumber under tbe following contract, dated March 20, 1889, signed by defendant as first party and by plaintiff as second party: “ The said first party does this day hereby let unto said second party the contract for driving a certain lot of logs, to contain four million feet, more or less, in and along a stream called Stony creek and its branches, viz.: Quemahoning, Paint, Clear, and Dark Shade, from where said logs are banked…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Heydbick,
The single question in this cause is whether the contract upon which the plaintiff sued is entire or severable. If it is entire it is conceded that the learned court below properly directed a verdict for the defendant; if severable, it is not denied that the cause ought to have been submitted to the jury. The criterion by which it is to be determined to which class any particular contract shall be assigned is thus stated in 1 Parsons on Contracts, 29-31: “ If the part to be performed by one party consists of several and distinct items, and the price *539to be paid…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Rugg & Bryan v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Lucesco Oil Co. v. BrewerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
3Cited by4 opinions
- Easton v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Rock Island Sash & Door Works v. Moore, Handley Hdw. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1906
- Huber v. Blackwell Lumber Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1915
- Norris v. ClarkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905