Briggs v. Morris
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 199, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. No. 3, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1912, No. 355, for defendants non obstante veredicto in case of Philip S. Briggs v. James H. Morris and Fred S. Morris. Assumpsit to recover commissions.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 199, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. No. 3, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1912, No. 355, for defendants non obstante veredicto in case of Philip S. Briggs v. James H. Morris and Fred S. Morris. Assumpsit to recover commissions. Verdict for plaintiff for $28,215.14. Upon a motion for judgment non obstante veredicto, Ferguson, j., filed the following opinion: In the latter part of the year 1908 the plaintiff Briggs entered the employ of the defendants as a bond salesman. Under the terms of his employment he was to .receive a salary of $250 a month and all of his…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cubiam,
The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of the court below entering judgment for the defendants non obstante veredicto.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Arkansas Valley Town & Land Co. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Greater Service Homebuilders Investment Ass'n v. AlbrightSupreme Court of Colorado · 1930
- Windsor Manufacturing Co. v. S. Makransky & SonsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- J. W. Ringrose Co. v. SloaneDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1920
- Auto Security Co. v. MickensSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.