Legal Opinion

Albert v. Schenley Auto Sales, Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 24, 1953No. Appeal, 115PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Bell,

Plaintiffs brought an action of assumpsit to recover damages for alleged breach of a written contract to purchase certain real estate. Defendant filed an answer denying the breach and asserted a counterclaim for damages for failing to give a deed to all the property described in the agreement of sale.

The agreement of sale entered into between the parties on February 9, 1949, contains a description of the real estate as follows: “ALL THAT CERTAIN piece or parcel of ground situate in the 32nd Ward of the City of Pittsburgh fronting 50 feet more or less on Saw Mill Run…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Waldman v. ShoemakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Pennsylvania Railroad v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. McDonald v. FerrebeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Medvidovich v. SchultzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  5. Kittaning Coal Co. v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Barium Steel Corp. v. WileySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  2. Foulke v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  3. Brennan v. Shore Brothers, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  4. Laughlin v. Baltalden, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  5. Pencil v. BuchartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

11 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