Lummis & Co. v. Devine
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 142, Oct. T., 1898, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Pbila. Co., June T., 1897, No. 146, in favor of defendant non obstante veredicto. Assumpsit. Before Beitler, J. It appears from tbe evidence that defendant was secretary of the plaintiff corporation and on March 27, 1889, the following resolution was passed: “ Resolved, That John F. Devine as secretary of the company, shall receive for his services ten per cent of the net profits of the company.”
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 142, Oct. T., 1898, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Pbila. Co., June T., 1897, No. 146, in favor of defendant non obstante veredicto. Assumpsit. Before Beitler, J. It appears from tbe evidence that defendant was secretary of the plaintiff corporation and on March 27, 1889, the following resolution was passed: “ Resolved, That John F. Devine as secretary of the company, shall receive for his services ten per cent of the net profits of the company.” In 1890 this resolution was re-enacted and fixed the terms of his employment for that year. On May 12, 1891, the following…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Oblady, J.,
On May 12,1891, the plaintiff corporation passed a resolution to fix the compensation to be paid to the defendant, viz: “ Resolved, that JohnF. Devine, as secretary of the corporation and general clerk, shall receive for his services ten per cent, of the net profits of the company with fifteen dollars per week, the same to continue until March 1, 1892; Resolved that the ten per cent, of the profits shall be held to also mean ten per cent, of the net running losses.”
During the five succeeding years, the business was conducted at a profit, and the defendant received the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wright v. Monongahela Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Coleman v. GrubbSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854