Legal Opinion

Kardon v. Crescent Nut & Chocolate Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 22, 1930No. Appeal 254PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Gawthrop, J.,

This is an action in assumpsit to recover the purchase price of goods sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant. The case was tried before Judge Glass without a jury and a finding was made for plaintiff. Defendant appeals from the order overruling its motion for a new trial.

Three of the four questions stated in appellant’s brief raise the single question whether there was such a variance between the allegations and the proofs as to require the trial judge to find for defendant on that ground. It would be a sufficient answer to state that the record fails to disclose…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kehres v. StuempfleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Haney v. HatfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  3. Popper v. RosenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  4. United Fruit Co. v. BiseseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Williams v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  2. Sipior v. United States Glass Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  3. Emerson v. Universal Products Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1934
  4. Friedlander v. ShorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API