T. L. Smith Co. v. Burd P. Evans & Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 289, Oct. T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1910, No. 765, on verdict for plaintiff in case of T. L. Smith Company v. Burd P. Evans & Company. Assumpsit to recover the price of a concrete mixing machine. Before Ralston, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court gave binding instructions for plaintiff. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $285.57. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 289, Oct. T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1910, No. 765, on verdict for plaintiff in case of T. L. Smith Company v. Burd P. Evans & Company. Assumpsit to recover the price of a concrete mixing machine. Before Ralston, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court gave binding instructions for plaintiff. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $285.57. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were in giving binding instructions for plaintiff.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
The contract on which this action of assumpsit was founded, consisted of a written offer by plaintiff, accepted in writing by defendant, to sell and deliver to defendant a Smith Concrete Mixer with gasoline engine for a specified price in cash. ■ The defendant admitted the execution of the contract, the delivery of the articles contracted for and its indebtedness to the plaintiff for the balance of the purchase price claimed in the action, but alleged a set-off. This set-off was a claim for damages for the breach of another contract alleged to have been made on the same…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lauer Brewing Co. v. SchmidtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Dodge v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
3Cited by2 opinions
- Yubas v. MakranskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Mahoning Valley Bread Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924