American Bridge Co. v. Duquesne Steel Foundry Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 151, April T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T., 1903, No. 539, on verdict for plaintiff in case of American Bridge Company v. Duquesne Steel Foundry Company. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before'Etans, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 151, April T., 1904, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T., 1903, No. 539, on verdict for plaintiff in case of American Bridge Company v. Duquesne Steel Foundry Company. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Before'Etans, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court charged in part as follows: The plaintiff seeks to recover a balance which it alleges is due for some manufactured goods which it sold and delivered to the defendant. The claim of the plaintiff for the goods sold and delivered is admitted by the defendant. But…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
Plaintiff brought suit against the defendant for certain merchandise bought by the latter from the former. Defendant set up as a defense a balance due on a previous account for materials purchased by the plaintiff from the defendant. A material question in the case arose as to the point, of delivery of the materials last mentioned. The contract was in writing, based upon the correspondence between the parties. The material parts aré as follows :
Plaintiff, writing defendant, October 16,1901, says : “Please quote us best price f. o. b. cars East Berlin, Conn., for the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Charles E. Hires Co. v. StromeyerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. v. Tacony Iron Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913