Woodruff v. Gunton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 331, Jan. T., 1907, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Sullivan Co., May T., 1903, No. 68, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William L. Woodruff v. Walter B. Gunton. Assumpsit for royalties under a coal lease. Before Terry, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 331, Jan. T., 1907, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Sullivan Co., May T., 1903, No. 68, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William L. Woodruff v. Walter B. Gunton. Assumpsit for royalties under a coal lease. Before Terry, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. At the trial the court charged in part as follows: [Now the plaintiff has called on the stand witnesses who are familiar with the process of mining anthracite coal, mining engineers, and you have heard their testimony. In substance it is that the production of culm is a necessary incident in…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Brown,
On this appeal from a judgment recovered against him in an *380action on a coal lease the appellant raises two questions, one as to the right of the lessor to recover interest on deferred payments of royalties, and the other as to the profits realized by him on culm sold. The lease was executed March 23,1898, and the parts of it relating to these two questions are as follows: “First: The lessee will pay to said lessors in monthly installrhents for so much coal as they may mine during the year 1898 at the rates hereinafter named: $3,000.00 for the balance of 1898;…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Brown v. EngleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Hodgdon v. Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914