Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Viking Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 14, 1938No. Appeal, 20PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Stadtfeld, J.,

This suit was originally begun by a foreign attachment. The defendant entered its appearance and filed its bond to dissolve the attachment, and the suit continued as in assumpsit. The suit was to recover the sum of $1585 upon a written contract with, the defendant, made by its vice-president, A. E. Johnson, on November 3,1934. At the first trial held on November 25, 1935, a non-suit was entered against the plaintiff on the ground that Mr. Johnson’s authority to enter into the contract for the defendant was not shown. On a motion to take off the non-suit, the court made…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Howell Et Ux. v. WheelockSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Bayne v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  3. Parker v. Oil Well Supply Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. United Refining Co. v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. International Milling Co. v. Hachmeister, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  3. Shehadi v. Northeastern Nat. Bank of Pa.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Neville v. ScottSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  5. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co. v. ZieglerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API