Peter Adams Paper Co. v. Cassard
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 207, Jan. T., 1902, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 5, Pliila. Co., March T., 1902, No. 3505, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Peter Adams Paper Company v. Linda R. Cassard. Assumpsit on a contract of suretyship. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court, Error assigned was order making absolute rule for judgment, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Dean,
Plaintiff brought this suit against defendant to recover $3,077.76 which amount was an indebtedness of her husband, Henry L. Cassard, for which she had become surety. The husband had purchased for himself from the paper company certain quantities of paper on credit. Before shipping the paper the wife delivered to the company this writing:
“September 9th, 1898.
“ Peteb Adams Papeb Company,
“ New York City.
“ Gentlemen: In consideration of your selling your paper to Harry L. Cassard, I agree to be responsible for all paper sold to him to the extent of three thousand…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- R. Patrick & Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Wiltbank v. ToblerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
3Cited by11 opinions
- Herr v. ReinoehlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Bartholomew v. Allentown National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Green v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- United Factors Corp. v. MogulSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Hagedorn v. HaberSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.