Velde v. Levering
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
• A case was stated for the opinion of the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, from which this case came up on a writ of error, to be considered as a special verdict. It was as' follows:— The plaintiff in error, who was also plaintiff below, brought an action of covenant upon an indenture of apprenticeship, against John Levering, who was guardian of Solomon Rauch.
Read the full summary
• A case was stated for the opinion of the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, from which this case came up on a writ of error, to be considered as a special verdict. It was as' follows:— The plaintiff in error, who was also plaintiff below, brought an action of covenant upon an indenture of apprenticeship, against John Levering, who was guardian of Solomon Rauch. By this indenture, which was made on the 1st of May, 1826, and the parties to which were Solomon Rauch,ith the consent of his guar dian, John Levering, the said guardian, and Michael Velde, the said Solomon Rauch…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Smith, J.
— The indenture in question, was not entered into under the statute of Elizabeth, by which the father is answerable for what is to be performed by the son; nor, of course, under any law of the state of Neto York, where, it would seem, that an ap*271prentice binding himself, with the consent of his father, and the father actually signing and sealing the indenture with the son, the father was bound for the son to the master, in case the son left his service before the end of the term; nor can the decisions, cited from the Connecticut Reports, avail,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Antoine v. SmithSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1888
- Leech v. AgnewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1847
- McAdams' Executors v. StilwellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850