Gibson v. Campbell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 57, Oct. T., 1913, by defendants, from judgment of O. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T. 1911, No. 199, on verdict for plaintiff in case of David T. Gibson v. John H. Campbell & A. E. Butler, doing business as Campbell & Butler. Assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on a contract for hauling. Before Patton, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 57, Oct. T., 1913, by defendants, from judgment of O. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T. 1911, No. 199, on verdict for plaintiff in case of David T. Gibson v. John H. Campbell & A. E. Butler, doing business as Campbell & Butler. Assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on a contract for hauling. Before Patton, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. While the plaintiff was undergoing cross examination defendant proposed to ask him certain questions, to which objections were made and sustained as follows: “By Mr. McCullough: We propose to ask the witness on the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mk. Justice Mestrezat,
This action was brought to recover a balance due on a *553contract for hauling. Plaintiff alleges that he entered into a verbal agreement on July 3, 1.903, to do certain hauling for the defendants who were partners in the business of drilling oil and gas wells. He claims that he was to receive $100 a month for himself and a certain team of horses and boarding for his teamster during his absence from home. He also alleges he did hauling for the defendants with an extra team for which he claims $1.50 a day. He continued to work under the contract, according to his…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DwyerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Sabin v. MichaelsenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Commonwealth v. GibsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Huguet v. Foodsales, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Chester County1980