Carrara Paint Agency Co. v. Naylor
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 129, Oct. T., 1905, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1905, No. 335, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Carrara Paint Agency Company v. Charles Naylor. Assumpsit on a draft. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 129, Oct. T., 1905, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1905, No. 335, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Carrara Paint Agency Company v. Charles Naylor. Assumpsit on a draft. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Defendant in his affidavit of defense averred : The Carrara Paint Agency Company, the plaintiff, by its agent, E. B. Browne, to wit: on or about September 24, 1902, sold to the defendant a carload (3,000 gallons) of Carrara paint at the usual and customary market…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Oklady, J.,
The defendant in his affidavit of defense clearly and positively avers that the verbal contract made with the plaintiff was for a car load (3,000 gallons) of Carrara paint at the usual and customary market price, and that he relied on the representation of the plaintiff’s agent that the price as stated in the making of the contract and acceptance of the draft embraced in the plaintiff’s claim, was $1.25 per gallon in car load lots f. o. b. Philadelphia; and that after accepting the draft he learned, and now avers, that the usual and customary price for this paint in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Rockafellow v. BakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1862
- Smith, Kline & French Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Fischer v. DalmasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Hubbard v. FrenchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Goodwin v. SchottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894