Arrott St.-P. Mills Co. v. Way Mfg. Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
No. 202 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. On April 15, 1889, the Arrott Steam-Power Mills Company, a corporation, brought assumpsit against the Way Manufacturing Company, Limited. Issue. At the trial, on April 7, 1890, the plaintiff introduced testimony tending to show, as was claimed: That, on.
Read the full summary
No. 202 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. On April 15, 1889, the Arrott Steam-Power Mills Company, a corporation, brought assumpsit against the Way Manufacturing Company, Limited. Issue. At the trial, on April 7, 1890, the plaintiff introduced testimony tending to show, as was claimed: That, on. April 1, 1883, William Arrott, the owner of a factory building in Philadelphia, made a parol lease of the fifth floor of the same to J. Howard Way, Pennington Way, A. T. Evanson and Hunter Evanson, trading as J. H. Way, Brother & Co., at an annual rental of $1,500,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Mr. Justice Sterrett:
The first specification of error was abandoned.
The main question presented by the second to the fourth specifications, inclusive, is as to the competency of the witness John H. Way, a member of the company defendant, and also of the companies which preceded it, to prove conversations with William Arrott, deceased, the lessor, in relation to the terms of the first lease made in April, 1883, etc. The facts bearing on the question are somewhat complicated. Some of them are embodied in the specifications, and others necessary to an understanding of the question are…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Yentis v. MillsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Campbell's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Myers v. LittsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Swoope's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Broderick Co. v. Emert, Dec'd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.