Legal Opinion

Cepull v. Borland

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Westmoreland County

Decided February 28, 1952No. nos. 235, 236, 237Published

1Opinion of the Court

Bauee, J.,

Plaintiffs in each of these actions complain in indebitatus assumpsit against the estate of S. Raymond King. Plaintiff, Edythe Cepull, claims:

“On or about the 11th day of April, 1942, the plaintiff entered into an oral agreement with S. Raymond King, deceased; under the terms of the agreement the *528plaintiff was to act as farm manager for Mr. King, performing the following duties . .; and “the agreed compensation of $7.50 per week was a fair and reasonable price . . .”.

Plaintiff Hazel Walters claims:

“During the month of April 1948 at the request of S. Raymond King, and for a promised…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Gilbraith's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Cox v. Wilkes-Barre Railway Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. Cummiskey's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  4. Witten v. StoutSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  5. Mussolino Et Ux. v. Coxe Bros. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API