Legal Opinion

Aronsky v. Byron Silk Mills, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 10, 1929No. Appeal 9PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Teexler, J.,

A receiver was appointed for the Byron Silk Mills, Inc. The Salisbury Realty Company, the appellant, presented a claim, at the audit of the receiver’s account, for $1,925 for rent. The court allowed $835. The original lease was made March 1, 1925, for three years with the Manhattan Silk Company. The Byron Silk Mills, Inc., took over the property in April, 1927. There was no assignment of the lease to it, but there was a verbal understanding as to the amount to be paid and recognition of the existing lease.

At or about the time of expiration of the lease, March 1, 1928,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Scouton v. Stony Brook Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. West Philadelphia Buick Co. v. ShusterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  2. Brodsky v. Schnepper (In re Gross)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API