Legal Opinion

Dinger v. Friedman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 7, 1924No. Appeals, Nos. 133 and 134PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Moschzisker,

B. D. Dinger served Henry Friedman and Henry Flaster in a suit to recover for work done under two written contracts made between him and one Joseph Arnold; he obtained a verdict on which judgment was entered, and defendants have appealed.

The first writing in suit states that “B. D. Dinger ......agrees to drill three [oil or gas] wells for Joseph Arnold on the locations and at the places decided upon by the said Joseph Arnold,” for a stipulated consideration. The second writing refers to the first and mentions Arnold as “doing business” under the name of…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Rhodes v. TerheydenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. McConville v. InghamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  3. Edmundson's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  4. Dillon's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  5. Dickson v. McGraw Bros.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Evans v. Penn Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. Commonwealth v. LambertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. General Equipment Manufacturers v. Westfield InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Comstock v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  5. Greenfield v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API