Thompson v. Piot
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 65, Oct. T., 1912, by Antonio Fiorella, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1908, No. 4,667, on verdict-for plaintiff in case of Charles J. Thompson, trading as Keystone Lime & Coal Company, v. Frank Piot and Antonio Fiorella, trading as Piot & Fiorella. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered for a building operation.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 65, Oct. T., 1912, by Antonio Fiorella, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1908, No. 4,667, on verdict-for plaintiff in case of Charles J. Thompson, trading as Keystone Lime & Coal Company, v. Frank Piot and Antonio Fiorella, trading as Piot & Fiorella. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered for a building operation. Before McMichael, P. J. At the trial the court charged, inter alia, as follows: [Mr. Matthews has raised the point whether there is a denial of the partnership in the affidavit of defense. There is this allegation in the affidavit of defense. This…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
The plaintiff brought this action of assumpsit to recover of the defendants, as partners, for certain building *308materials alleged to have been delivered to them in their partnership business. He recovered a verdict and judgment in the court below and the defendant Fiorella appeals.
The first specification of error is founded upon that part of the charge of the court which instructed the jury as to the burden of proof, with regard to the existence of a partnership relation between the defendants, as affecting the liability of the defendant Fiorella. There was no evidence…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Denithorne v. HookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886