Price v. McCallister
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. This was an action of replevin brought by Thomas Price, plaintiff in error, who was plaintiff below, against Charles MeCallister and Wells Walton, defendants in error, who were defendants below, for a billiard table which was rented by Halfman & Newman, tenants of the defendant McOallister, and keepers of an hotel and billiard saloon, from Thomas Price, the plaintiff, to whom it was to be sold when he had paid a certain sum, which…
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. This was an action of replevin brought by Thomas Price, plaintiff in error, who was plaintiff below, against Charles MeCallister and Wells Walton, defendants in error, who were defendants below, for a billiard table which was rented by Halfman & Newman, tenants of the defendant McOallister, and keepers of an hotel and billiard saloon, from Thomas Price, the plaintiff, to whom it was to be sold when he had paid a certain sum, which table was distrained by McOallister for rent due from Halfman & Newman. To the plaintiff’s declaration the defendants…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered
by Woodward, J.
This case falls within the general rule that subjects goods and chattels found on demised premises to distress for rent, and is not within any of the established excep- - tions to that rule.
One of these exceptions is in favor of chattels placed on the premises to be wrought, worked, or managed in the way of the tenant’s trade or employment (Smith’s Landlord and Tenant, 187; Cadwallader v. Tindall, 8 H. 422), but this billiard table was not brought upon these premises for any such purpose. It was there as a part of the plaintiff’s capital in…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Whiting & Co. v. LakeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1879
- Groves v. LewisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913