Flegal v. Hoover
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 299, Jan. T., 1893, by-defendants, Hoover, Hughes & Co., from judgment of C. P. Clearfield Co., Sept. T.,-.1892, No. 341, on verdict for plaintiff, Jacob Scott Flegal. Assumpsit for price of logs and bark.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 299, Jan. T., 1893, by-defendants, Hoover, Hughes & Co., from judgment of C. P. Clearfield Co., Sept. T.,-.1892, No. 341, on verdict for plaintiff, Jacob Scott Flegal. Assumpsit for price of logs and bark. At the trial, before Krebs, P. J., it appeared that, on May 8, 1891, George Arick, P. IV. and A. M. Draucker and John Hays, of the one part, entered into a contract in writing with Hoover, Hughes & Co., for cutting, peeling and stocking all the timber on certain lands owned by the latter. The contractors went into possession of the land, and operated under the contract.…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
This case was unfortunately tried on a wrong basis through*280out. It was assumed that the agreement of May, 1892, was an accord, and as its terms had not been fully carried out, that there had been no satisfaction, that the agreement was therefore inoperative, and the parties were remitted to their rights and liabilities under the original contract. This was a radical error. The agreement of May, 1892, was a compromise of disputed rights. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff was violating the contract in such manner as to entitle them to rescind, and they had…
2Cited by35 opinions
- Lombardo v. Gasparini Excavating Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- York Metal & Alloys Co. v. Cyclops Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Kirk v. Brentwood Manor Homes, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Armstrong v. Sacramento Valley R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Dreifus v. Columbian Exposition Salvage Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.