Sartwell v. Wilcox
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of M7c county. This was an action of assumpsit to May Term, 1849,. by Solomon Sartwell v. William P. Wilcox, to recover the sum of $1000. The declaration contained the usual counts for money had and received, and a special count on an agreement in venting, hereafter referred to. The plea was non assumpsit and set-off, with leave, &c.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of M7c county. This was an action of assumpsit to May Term, 1849,. by Solomon Sartwell v. William P. Wilcox, to recover the sum of $1000. The declaration contained the usual counts for money had and received, and a special count on an agreement in venting, hereafter referred to. The plea was non assumpsit and set-off, with leave, &c. In the fall of 1836, O. C. Gaskill, as executor for B. B. Cooper, entered into an agreement with Wilcox, the defendant, to sell him all the lands of B. B. Cooper in McKean county, being about sixty thousand aeres, at 75 cents per acre.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered, by
Woodward, J.
This action was founded on the agreement of 15th March, 1842. It might have been a legitimate ground of defence to the action that the contractivas corruptly and fraudulently obtained, but we see no suggestion of fraud in this record, except in the charge of the Court.
No fraud is alleged in the pleadings, none proved in the evidence, and the defendant submitted no points to the Court touching fraud. Yet the Court, in answering affirmatively the plaintiff’s points, told the jury twice, that if there was any fraud by the plaintiff, or if the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Herster v. HersterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Keller v. CohenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Brink v. BradySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909