Frank Spangler Co. v. Haupt
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 103, Oct. T., 1912, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Schuylkill Co., Nov. T., 1911, No. 139, refusing to take off compulsory nonsuit in case of The Frank Spangler Company v. D. F. Haupt. Trespass for deceit. Before Bechtel, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. At the trial the court entered a compulsory nonsuit which it subsequently refused to take off. Error assigned was in refusing to take off nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
The plaintiff was a wholesale dealer in lumber in the state of Ohio and the defendant was engaged in the retail lumber business in the state of Pennsylvania. The plaintiff sent out circular letters offering certain kinds of lumber at certain prices. One of these letters was addressed to D. P. Haupt, and, he having died, was delivered to D. F. Haupt his son, this defendant. On February 13, 1908, he wrote to the plaintiff, “Your letter and price list, addressed to D. P. Haupt (of which I am the successor of) received.” Then follows an order for a car load of lumber. At the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Rice v. BoyerIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Wilt v. WelshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
- Neff v. LandisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Penrose ex rel. Hutchinson v. CurrenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Ryan v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Kay v. HauptSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Gindin v. SilverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Musser v. SchockSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Yubas v. WitaskisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Bradley v. Cool, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.