Estate of Heller
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 24, Oct. T., 1897, by-Carter & Co., from decree of O. C. Phila. Co., Oet. Sess., 1890, No. 99, dismissing appellant’s claim in distribution. Porter, J., dissents. Exceptions to adjudication of Penrose, auditing judge.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 24, Oct. T., 1897, by-Carter & Co., from decree of O. C. Phila. Co., Oet. Sess., 1890, No. 99, dismissing appellant’s claim in distribution. Porter, J., dissents. Exceptions to adjudication of Penrose, auditing judge. At the adjudication of the estate of Herman Heller, deceased, a claim was presented by Carter & Company for goods sold and delivered to decedent which was dismissed by Penrose, auditing judge, in an adjudication, which was, inter alia, as follows : The claim of Carter & Company, at whose instance the account was so filed, was for goods sold, $113.49, with interest…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
The appellants argue, that the point of this case is whether time is of the essence of the contract, when the vendee of goods has them specially manufactured for his use and leaves them in the possession of the vendor subject to order. But we do not so understand the question raised. The contract, as evidenced by the decedent’s written order which was accepted by the' appellants, contains nothing which indicates that the second instalment was to be held subject to order. Nor do we find any competent parol evidence that such was the understanding of the parties. The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Duffield v. HueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Grandin v. Rochester German InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Lane v. NelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Dick v. IrelandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Haws v. Fire Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
3Cited by2 opinions
- Parish Mfg. Corp. v. Martin-Parry Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Germain Fruit Co. v. Thomas Roberts & Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898