Legal Opinion

Potter v. Leitenberger Machine Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 15, 1949No. Appeal, 161PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rhodes, P. J.,

Plaintiff in this action in assumpsit has sought to recover damages from defendant for breach of an alleged contract. Defendant’s preliminary objections to plaintiff’s complaint were sustained by the court below on the ground that the contract was unenforceable because of uncertainty and lack of mutuality. Plaintiff has appealed.

The alleged contract consisted, in part, of a “car order blank” dated March 11, 1946, by which plaintiff ordered from the defendant a Plymouth automobile. The order blank as filled in contained nothing specific except the type, make, and color…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Detwiler v. CaponeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Butler v. KemmererSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
  3. Edgcomb v. CloughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  4. Lightcap v. KeaggySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  5. Swing v. WalkerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Lombardo v. Gasparini Excavating Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  2. Columbian Rope Co. v. Rinek Cordage Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Mathers v. Roxy Auto Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Schlechter v. FoltzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Transicoil, Inc. v. Blue Dove Development Associates, Ltd. Partnership (In Re Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1996

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

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

Powered by the Exa API