Davis v. Hawkins
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 40, Jan. T., 1894, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. McKean Co., Feb. T., 1890, No. 240, on exceptions to report of referee.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 40, Jan. T., 1894, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. McKean Co., Feb. T., 1890, No. 240, on exceptions to report of referee. Assumpsit to recover moneys alleged to have been obtained by false representations# The referee, Robert F. Glenn, Esq., found the facts as follows : “1. That on July 8, 1877, R. W. Mackey was the owner of what was known as the ‘ Funk well,’ together with five acres of ground on which said well was located, situated in Oilereek township, Venango county, Pennsylvania. ) “ 2. That claiming power of attorney to do so, A. C. Hawkins, on said date, receipted to…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitcheel,
The referee found only a constructive fraud by the defendant, and the action was therefore barred by the statute of limitations which in such cases begins to run from the date of-the act committed. Hollinshead’s Appeal, 103 Pa. 158, 165.
But the -learned judge below was entirely right in holding that there was no sufficient evidence of fraud at all. The plaintiff’s whole cause of action hinges, on the narrow question *233of fact whether defendant represented that he had a “ power of attorney ” or merely an “ authority ” to sell. If the latter then' there was no…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hollinshead's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hendrickson EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Wilson v. Galena-Signal Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923