Melroy v. Kemmerer
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 388, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lehigh Co., June T., 1906, No. 31, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Emma E. M. Melroy and Thomas B. Bachman, trading as Melroy & Bachman, v. Charles R. Kemmerer. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 388, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lehigh Co., June T., 1906, No. 31, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Emma E. M. Melroy and Thomas B. Bachman, trading as Melroy & Bachman, v. Charles R. Kemmerer. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before Trexler, P. J. At the trial the defendant testified that on December 6, 1902, he had paid the plaintiff thirty per cent, of the amount claimed, and that this was a good accord and satisfaction of the whole claim, because at the time payment was made, plaintiffs had dissuaded him from going into bankruptcy. The court…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Chief Justice Mitchell,
It was said in Ebert v. Johns, 206 Pa. 395, that the rule that the acceptance of a smaller sum for a debt presently due though agreed and expressed to be payment in full, is not a good accord and satisfaction, was a deduction of scholastic logic and was always regarded as more logical than just, and hence any circumstance of variation is sufficient to take a case out of the rule. As illustrations of such circumstances of variation, it has been held that payment a day or even an hour before the debt is due, or at a different place, or of a certainty in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Fuller v. . KempNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Curtiss v. MartinIllinois Supreme Court · 1858
- Hinckley v. AreySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1847
- Fowler v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Pettigrew Machine Co. v. HarmonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Chatham Communications, Inc. v. General Press Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Riley & Co. v. London Guaranty & Accident Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
- Ferguson-McKinney Dry Goods Co. v. GarrettTexas Commission of Appeals · 1923
- C. S. Brackett Co. v. LofgrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
- Levine v. BlumenthalSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1936
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.