Legal Opinion

Lamborn & Co. v. Apollo Supply Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 29, 1926No. Appeal 169Published

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

After plaintiffs had proved their claim, defendants counterclaimed against it for damages resulting from plaintiffs’ alleged breach of contract to sell sugar to defendants. The court refused to direct a verdict for plaintiffs, and instructed the jury to find for defendants and to assess the damages. Plaintiffs moved for judgment, n. o. v., and their motion was refused. Judgment against the plaintiffs was entered on the verdict as directed.

This appeal depends on the meaning of the contract which is the basis of the counterclaim. It provided: “We [plaintiffs] have this day…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Brawley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Wheeler v. New Brunswick & Canada RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  3. Dimmick v. Banning, Cooper & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  4. Crystal Paper Co. v. Robertson Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1923
  5. H. O. Wilbur & Sons, Inc. v. LambornSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923

5 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