Atherholt v. Hughes
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 25, Jan. T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Columbia Co., Jan. T., 1904, No. 25, on verdict’ for plaintiff in case of John Atherholt and Lillie Atherholt, his Wife, v. Charles Hughes. Assumpsit for balance alleged to be due on a written contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 25, Jan. T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Columbia Co., Jan. T., 1904, No. 25, on verdict’ for plaintiff in case of John Atherholt and Lillie Atherholt, his Wife, v. Charles Hughes. Assumpsit for balance alleged to be due on a written contract. Before Little, P.'J. At the trial the following offer was made : Mr. Ikeler: The defendant proposes to prove by the witness upon the stand that prior to the execution of the written contract in suit, the witness together with John Atherholt and another party- visited the tract of timber in question and attempted at that time…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Fell,
This action was brought to recover a balance claimed on a written contract for the purchase of standing timber by the defendant. The contract included the timber on a wood lot which was part of the plaintiff’s farm. The lot was described as a part of the farm containing about fifty-four acres, and included all the timber not in the fields under cultivation. The lot contained only thirty-two acres. This fact was not known by the defendant until a part of the timber had been cut and removed. The defense was a partial failure of consideration because of the false…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mahaffey v. FergusonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- County of Schuylkill v. CopleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- McCulloch v. McKeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851
- Brotherton Bros. v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ohlbaum v. MayerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Machin v. Prudential Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904