Legal Opinion

DeWitt Wire Cloth Co. v. Griffith

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 3, 1911No. Appeal, No. 81Published

Appeal, No. 81, Oct. T., 1910, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1909, No. 3,196, for defendants on demurrer to statement of claim in case of DeWitt Wire Cloth Company v. John R. Griffith and Samuel F. Wilson, now or late trading as Shields & Brother. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 81, Oct. T., 1910, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1909, No. 3,196, for defendants on demurrer to statement of claim in case of DeWitt Wire Cloth Company v. John R. Griffith and Samuel F. Wilson, now or late trading as Shields & Brother. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The statement of claim averred that the plaintiff was a corporation of the state of New York registered in the state of Pennsylvania, with a store and sales room in the city of Philadelphia. It further averred that on February 11, 1908, the defendants gave the plaintiff…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rice, P. J.,

This is an appeal from judgment for defendants on demurrer. The action was assumpsit for the price of goods which, by the defendants’ written orders, accepted by the plaintiff, were to be shipped to one John O’Donnell, who was the defendants’ salesman and agent at Atlantic City, New Jersey, via the Reading Railroad. The specific reasons assigned in support of the demurrer were, (1) that the statement did not allege a sufficient delivery of the goods, (2) that it was not properly verified.

The second reason is not noticed in the appellees’ brief and is not good. The…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Erie Boot & Shoe Co. v. EichenlaubSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API