Clemson v. Davidson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
REPLEVIN. This cause came on for trial a second time, before the Chief Justice at a Nisi Prius in February last, when the same facts were in evidence, that are stated in the preceding volume, (page 405) with these additions.
Read the full summary
REPLEVIN. This cause came on for trial a second time, before the Chief Justice at a Nisi Prius in February last, when the same facts were in evidence, that are stated in the preceding volume, (page 405) with these additions. When the plaintiff went to receive from Davidson his notes for the flour which had been carried down to the Flibernia, he gave him a bill of parcels, which Davidson returned, saying his notes would be of no service to him, and telling him to go and take possession of the flour. That the plaintiff went to the captain of the Hibernia, and to her consignee Mr. Griffith,…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
In my charge to the jury on the trial of this cause, I submitted two facts to their determination. 1st. Whether the flour was actually delivered by Clemson to Davidson. 2d. If delivered, whether the contract was afterwards rescinded by consent of both parties. The evidence of a delivery was so strong, that I cannot suppose the jury had any hesitation on that point. As to the rescinding of the contract, it appeared to me that the evidence inclined considerably in favour of the defendants; because Davidson refused to give an order for the re-delivery of the flour, and declared…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Marsh v. PierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833
- The TornadoSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Pringle v. PringleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Kollock v. JacksonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
- Aycinena v. PeriesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.