Legal Opinion

Sheinman Bros. v. Hovland-Sardeson-McColm Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 3, 1922No. Appeal, No. 42PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal, No. 42, Oct. T., 1921, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1918, No. 10, on verdict for defendant, in the case of Harry Sheinman and Max Sbeinman, copartners, trading as Sbeinman Brothers, v. Hovland-Sardeson-McColm Company. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Finletter, J. The action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover damages for defendant’s failure to deliver goods in accordance with a written agreement.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 42, Oct. T., 1921, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1918, No. 10, on verdict for defendant, in the case of Harry Sheinman and Max Sbeinman, copartners, trading as Sbeinman Brothers, v. Hovland-Sardeson-McColm Company. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Finletter, J. The action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover damages for defendant’s failure to deliver goods in accordance with a written agreement. The defendant in a set-off and counterclaim sought to recover $1,108.84 the price of part of the goods delivered. The plaintiffs in their…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The plaintiff’s action was brought to recover damages arising from the alleged failure of the defendant company to deliver a quantity of cloth pursuant to the following memorandum, signed by the defendant’s authorized agent:

“Hovland-Sardeson-McColm Co.
“Designers and Makers of Coats and Suits
“Chicago, Oct. 1
“Sold to Sheinman Bros.
“240 So. 5th St.
“767-50 pieces Poplin at 157%' x 5% delivery Jan. and Feb. 2/10-60 Providing same is satisfactory to Whitman & Co. About 25 to 50 pieces velour, American about equal asst. 220 x 2%c. yd.
“(Signed) Borge.”

The pieces of poplin were…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Gandy v. WeckerlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  2. Commonwealth v. DanzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
  3. Croyle v. Cambria Land & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  4. Dannals v. Sylvania TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  5. Greenawalt v. KohneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Curry v. RigglesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  2. Braddock Township AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Silver v. MillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  4. Keystone Bank v. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Specialties, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. Keystone Commercial Co. v. Horowitz, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1923

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

Powered by the Exa API