Roberts v. Cauffiel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Simpson,
Appellant, who was defendant below, was the fiscal agent of the Copper Tungsten Company, and otherwise interested in it. The jury have found that, personally and through his agents, he agreed with certain prospective applicants for the stock of his company, among them being the appellees in these two cases, that if they would subscribe for the stock, he would, if they subsequently became dissatisfied, repurchase it from them, paying for it the amount they had paid, with interest. Upon these terms, appellees subscribed to and paid for the stock; in due time they…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Murray v. FrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Guppy v. MoltrupSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Furman v. BrosciousSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Commonwealth v. ContnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
- Galbraith v. Bridges & WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Evans v. Otis Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
- Reifsnyder v. DoughertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Cleary v. Quaker City Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- American Trust Co. v. KaufmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Keller v. N. J. Fidelity & Plate Glass InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.