Cooper v. Bickford
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County. Two actions of assumpsit were brought by Eri Bickford, against Wm. M. Cooper & Co., in which the plaintiff claimed to recover the fruits of a special agreement in writing, upon the common counts, in indebitatus assumpsit. The first was for staves delivered up to Feb. 11,1857 — the other for staves delivered from that period till 16th June following. They were tried together by consent.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Cambria County. Two actions of assumpsit were brought by Eri Bickford, against Wm. M. Cooper & Co., in which the plaintiff claimed to recover the fruits of a special agreement in writing, upon the common counts, in indebitatus assumpsit. The first was for staves delivered up to Feb. 11,1857 — the other for staves delivered from that period till 16th June following. They were tried together by consent. In the first case the verdict was for $528 25; in the second for $1,252 26. By agreement in writing, dated May 8th, 1856, plaintiff as- ■ signed to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Thompson, J.
“It is certainly established,” said C. J. Gibson in Harris vs. Ligget, 1 W. & S. 361, “by the force of precedent, that where the plaintiff has performed a special agreement to do a particular thing, he may recover the stipulated price of it by an action of indebitatus assumpsit and use the agreement as evidence of the amount of compensation due.” And he might have added of the thing to be done. He cites many English and American authorities in support of the rule not necessary at this time to be referred to. There .is no room for doubt on…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- M'Clelland v. LindsaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Peltier v. PenningtonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1834