Legal Opinion

Custis v. Serrill

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 28, 1931No. Appeal, 320PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

The only question involved in this appeal is whether appellant’s bill contains sufficient averments to sustain equity jurisdiction.

Custis, appellant, and Serrill, one of the appellees, entered into an agreement to erect a cold storage plant convenient to the Dock Street Market, Philadelphia, the plant to be later leased to a company which they would organize. The plan included an agreement with some railroad as a necessary incident to its success. Serrill and Custis were each to have a fifty per cent interest in the enterprise. Custis failed to induce the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gray v. Phila. & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Williams v. Finlaw, Mueller & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  3. Cameron, SEC. of B. v. P. Bk. of MaytownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  4. Trefts v. KingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Bata v. Central-Penn Nat. Bank of Phila.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Ralph J. Paolino v. Channel Home Centers and Air Control Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
  3. N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Brandwene Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  4. Pequea Township v. HerrCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Gallagher v. MerrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951

24 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