Williams v. Wenger
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 142, Oct. T., 1911, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Có., Dec. T., 1908, No. 202, on verdict for plaintiff in case of George Charles Williams, Leon A. Engle and August Stolle, trading as Wallerstein & Company, v. Morris Wenger. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 142, Oct. T., 1911, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Có., Dec. T., 1908, No. 202, on verdict for plaintiff in case of George Charles Williams, Leon A. Engle and August Stolle, trading as Wallerstein & Company, v. Morris Wenger. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Carr, J., charged as follows: In this case there was a claim made of $85.90. Upon that there was an allowance made for articles and goods which the defendant kept of $27.63, leaving a balance of $58.16. And again there was a further item of $3.88, for which the defendant admits liability. Therefore,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hendekson, J.,
The jury found against the defendant on the question of the existence of a custom relating to the retention and return of merchandise sold by manufacturers or jobbers to customers, and conceding that the evidence was sufficient if credited to establish a custom that part of the controversy is disposed of. The only remaining question is as to the right of the defendant on the contract for the purchase of the goods, where time is of the essence of the contract, to receive and examine the consignment and select and retain such portions as suited his interest and return…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Geo. McKay & Co. v. McKennaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Gausler v. BridgesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900