Kelly Springfield Road Roller Co. v. Spyker
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 76, Jan. T., 1906, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Huntingdon Co., Dec. T., 1905, No. 49, for plaintiff on feigned issue in case of Kelly Springfield Road Roller Co. v. S. I. Spyker. Feigned issue to determine title to a steam road roller. Before Woods, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned amongst others was in refusing binding instructions for plaintiff.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This was a feigned issue to determine the title to a steam road roller delivered to the defendants in the execution under the following offer, signed by the plaintiff’s general sales agent: “ Order subject to acceptance by the home office. Syracuse, New York, May 18,1905. Mountain & Malone, Holidaysburg, Pa. Dear Sirs: We hereby agree to lease you one ten-ton steam road roller as good as new, f. o. b., Springfield, Ohio, for the full sum of $2,000, payable as follows : July 1, $250; September 1, $250, etc.; roller to have a band wheel. We will guarantee roller to be first-class;…
2Cited by15 opinions
- S. F. Bowser & Co. v. Franklin Mortgage & Investment Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Stern Company v. PaulSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- L. C. Smith & Bro. Typewriter Co. v. AllemanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1912
- Stern v. DrewCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1922
- Miller v. DouglasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.