Legal Opinion

Hill v. Marcus & Holtzman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 23, 1923No. Appeal, 27PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

Action in assumpsit in the County Court of Allegheny County for damages from breach of contract. Trial by a judge without a jury. Finding and judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal from the order of the court of common pleas refusing an appeal from the county court.

The case depends on whether there was a sufficient memorandum in writing, signed by the defendants’ agent, to make the contract enforceable within section 4 of the Sales Act of 1915, P. L. 543; and this, in turn, depends on whether J. T. Taylor Brokerage Company, who negotiated the sale and signed the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Butler v. ThomsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. HowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  3. New York & Pennsylvania Co. v. New York Central R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  4. Roach v. LaneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  5. Dolan Mercantile Co. v. MarcusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McGowan v. Lustig-Burgerhoff Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. Penn Discount Corp. v. SharpSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Paw-Paw Co-Operative Ass'n v. SgarlattaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API