Barker v. Fairchild
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 416, Jan. T., 1894, by defendants, from order of C. P. Bradford Co., Dec. T., 1893, No. 172, making absolute a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The plaintiff in his statement averred as follows: “ Also Geo.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 416, Jan. T., 1894, by defendants, from order of C. P. Bradford Co., Dec. T., 1893, No. 172, making absolute a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The plaintiff in his statement averred as follows: “ Also Geo. S. Barker, the plaintiff in the above case, on the 31st day of October, 1891, sold and delivered to said defendants certain goods and merchandise as follows, and the following is a copy of the book entry thereof, ‘ Oct., 31st, 1891, 23908 lbs., Onions @ 80c. $189.65.’ “ And said plaintiff says that no part…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
It is alleged in the statement of claim filed that “the plaintiff on the 31st of October, 1891, sold and delivered to the defendant certain goods and merchandise as follows, and the following is a copy of the book entry thereof: “ Oct. 31st, 1891, 23908 lbs. onions @ 80c. $189.65.” The affidavit and supplemental affidavit of defense contain averments that the plaintiff did not sell and deliver to the defendants or either of them or to the firm of Fairchild, Grace & Co., the merchandise mentioned on the day named, and that neither the defendants nor the firm received…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fritz v. HathawaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
3Cited by5 opinions
- Genesee Paper Co. v. BogertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Hutton v. McLaughlinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- American Malting Co. v. Anthracite Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Williams v. MyersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Leo v. Pennsylvania RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899