Nathenson v. Crossland
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 146, April T., 1913, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Fayette Co., June T., 1910, No. 500, on verdict for plaintiff in case of D. Nathenson v. Joseph T. Crossland. Trespass to recover damages for the alleged wrongful sale of a horse. Before Umbel, P. J. The opinion of the Superior Court states the facts. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $136.87; defendant appealed. Errors assigned were various instructions.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Morrison, J.,
This is an action of trespass for the recovery of damages for the alleged unlawful sale of a horse by the defendant, a constable. The court below referred' the testimony to' the jury and a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff for the value of the horse. We think it may now be safely assumed that the jury substantially found the following facts: That on and prior to January 3, 1910, one H. Savitz, was the owner of a bay horse called "Jim” and a cheap harness worth about $2.00, and on that date he sold and delivered said horse and harness to the plaintiff,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Murtland v. EnglishSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Pittsb. C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. LyonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Stephens v. GiffordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- White v. GunnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- McKibbin v. MartinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.