Legal Opinion

Hill & MacMillan, Inc. v. Taylor

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 17, 1931No. Appeal, 10PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Maxey,

The plaintiff, a corporation, brought suit against the defendants, a copartnership, for failure to pay the plaintiff the sum, $2,190, stipulated in a written contract to be paid upon the delivery by plaintiff to the defendants of one six-ton H. M. gasoline locomotive of the size, character and specifications set forth in the contract. The jury found for the defendant, but the court entered judgment n. o. v. for the plaintiff in the sum of $2,620.33, with interest from the date of the verdict.

The defendants admit that, pursuant to the contract in suit, plaintiff…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Wright v. General Carbonic Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Federal Sales Co. v. FarrellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
  4. Ridgeway Dynamo & Engine Co. v. Pennsylvania Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  5. Port Carbon Iron Co. v. GrovesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BryantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Drury v. FrankeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
  3. Ebbert v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  4. Russell v. SicklesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  5. Harnischfeger Sale Corporation v. Sternberg Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1934

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

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

Powered by the Exa API