Vail v. Osburn
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 15, Jan. T., 1896, by defendants, from decree of C. P. Cameron Co., Sept. T., 1895, No. 32, continuing preliminary injunction. Bill in equity for specific performance.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 15, Jan. T., 1896, by defendants, from decree of C. P. Cameron Co., Sept. T., 1895, No. 32, continuing preliminary injunction. Bill in equity for specific performance. The bill alleged that on January 8, 1890, Charles Brown, Jerry Brown, C. E. Hoyt and Martin Lantz agreed with H. G. Lapham & Co., who were then the owners of the Sterling Run Tannery in Cameron Co., Pa. to cut, peel, haul and deliver at said tannery at their own expense and charge all the hemlock bark from certain lands owned by the first parties in the vicinity of said tannery; 1000 tons to be delivered on or…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cueiam,
This appeal is from the decree of August 10, 1895, continuing the preliminary injunction, theretofore granted, “ without prejudice to the rights of Gleason & Sons,” who were not then parties to the proceeding, but who on August 29, before this appeal was taken, were made parties defendant by amendment of the bill.
The subject-matter of the contract set out in the bill is within the jurisdiction of the court; and, if some of the defendants, nonresidents of the county, have not been regularly served with process, it is not too late to correct the error, if any there be. In the present…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Philadelphia Ball Club, Ltd. v. LajoieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Paullus v. YARBROUGH ET UXOregon Supreme Court · 1959
- Strause v. BergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Schipper Bros. Coal Mining Co. v. Economy Domestic Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Hawaiian Pineapple Co. v. SaitoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.