Windows v. Rudolph
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 186, April T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Jefferson Co., April T., 1906, No. 327, on verdict for plaintiff in case of M. Windows v. E. C. Rudolph. Trespass for deceit. Before Ormerod, P. J., specially presiding. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $162. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was in not entering judgment for plaintiff non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
The only specification of error pressed at the argument of this case, related to the defect in the statement by'plaintiff' of his cause of action. The action is in trespass for deceit. The statement was very negligently and unskillfully drawn, in that it failed to aver a scienter, and it would have been held bad on demurrer: Erie City Iron Works v. Barber, 102 Pa. 156; Griswold v. Gebbie, 126 Pa. 353; Scott v. Heisner, 33 Pa. Superior Ct. 286. The statement did, however, substantially aver that the defendant represented that he was the agent of the commissioners of the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Griswold v. GebbieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Erie City Iron Works v. BarberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Erie City Iron Works v. Barber & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
- Erie City Iron Works v. Barber & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Eckert v. SchochSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.