Shafer & Martin v. Randolph
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Orctwford county: Of October and November Term 1881, No. 56. Assumpsit, by Hiram Randolph and A. F. Randolph against Thomas Shafer and James Martin (and others not served) to recover for breach of an alleged contract, whereby the defendants procured the plaintiff to manufacture certain patented articles, under a patent-right owned by defendants, at a stipulated price, which the defendants afterwards refused to pay.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Orctwford county: Of October and November Term 1881, No. 56. Assumpsit, by Hiram Randolph and A. F. Randolph against Thomas Shafer and James Martin (and others not served) to recover for breach of an alleged contract, whereby the defendants procured the plaintiff to manufacture certain patented articles, under a patent-right owned by defendants, at a stipulated price, which the defendants afterwards refused to pay. The narr. averred a joint contract, on the part of the defendants, Shafer and Martin, and breach. There was no defence as to Shafer, except as…
1Opinion of the Court
Mi\ Justice Gordon
delivered the opinion of the court, January 2d 1882.
The counsel for the defendants below, plaintiffs in error, is not correct in his assertion that there was no evidence in this case tending to prove a partnership betAveen the defendants themselves, or with other parties. A. F. Randolph swears that Shafer told him that Gregg, Martin and Fisher were partners with hinself in this fanning mill adventure.
He furthermore repeats, that both Shafer and Martin informed him that they were in company Avith several other persons ; that upon his applying to Martin for his pay for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Johnston v. WardenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
3Cited by2 opinions
- Towner v. RodegebWashington Supreme Court · 1903
- Bing v. SchmittSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910