Lukens v. Aiken
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 248, Jan. T., 1895, by-defendant, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., Oct. T., 1894, No. 9, on verdict for plaintiff. Foreign attachment in assumpsit upon a promissory note for $500. Before Waddell, P. J. At the trial it appeared that in February, 1893, defendant bought of the plaintiff a steam traction engine, hay press and thresher for $1,200. He paid a part of the purchase money, and gave his note for the balance.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 248, Jan. T., 1895, by-defendant, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., Oct. T., 1894, No. 9, on verdict for plaintiff. Foreign attachment in assumpsit upon a promissory note for $500. Before Waddell, P. J. At the trial it appeared that in February, 1893, defendant bought of the plaintiff a steam traction engine, hay press and thresher for $1,200. He paid a part of the purchase money, and gave his note for the balance. Defendant claimed that misrepresentations had been made to him at the time of the sale, as to the machinery sold to him, and that the machinery was in a defective…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Williams,
This appeal depends upon the correctness of the rule given by the learned judge of the court below to the jury upon the measure of damages to which the defendant was entitled. The action was upon a note given by the defendant for a balance of purchase money due to the plaintiff for machinery bought of him. The defense was that the purchase of the machinery was induced by false representations made by the plaintiff as to the character, effectiveness and state of repair of the machinery at the time of sale. Evidence was given upon the trial tending to show that…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Browning v. RodmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Williams v. BeltzSupreme Court of Delaware · 1919
- Williams v. BeltzSuperior Court of Delaware · 1917