Legal Opinion

Mahony, Trustee v. Boenning

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 18, 1939No. 1; Appeal, 155PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Schaffer,

This is an action of assumpsit. The statement of claim contains two separate and distinct causes of action. In this opinion, we shall deal with only one of them, for $3,039.13, with interest, which culminated in a verdict in plaintiff’s favor for $1,557.03, as a result of binding instructions by the trial judge to that effect. We have this appeal by defendants from the judgment entered on the verdict, their contention being that judgment should be entered for them.

The evidence shows that C. D. Parker & Co., Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (of which Thomas H.…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Knight v. Gulf Refining CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  2. Montgomery v. Van RonkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  3. Slayback v. AlexanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
  4. Tribulas v. Continental Equitable Title & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  5. Armstrong v. BickelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rednor & Kline, Inc. v. Department of HighwaysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  2. Mahony, Trustee v. BoenningSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API