Sweeney v. Ten Mile Oil & Gas Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY DEFENDANT FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY. No. 143 October Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 153 February Term 1889, C. P. On December 15, 1888, a summons in assumpsit was served in an action by John F. Sweeney against tbe Ten Mile Oil & Gas Company. Tbe defendant pleaded not guilty.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY DEFENDANT FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY. No. 143 October Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 153 February Term 1889, C. P. On December 15, 1888, a summons in assumpsit was served in an action by John F. Sweeney against tbe Ten Mile Oil & Gas Company. Tbe defendant pleaded not guilty. At the trial on June 6, 1889, tbe plaintiff proved a contract in writing executed by himself and tbe defendant company, a corporation, on March 26,1887, in tbe shape of a “Proposition for tbe sale of tbe property and franchises of tbe Ten Mile Oil & Gas Company: First, tbe plant,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Mr. Justice Sterrett:
There was no error in excluding the letter offered “ for the purpose of showing that Col. Potts, although interested, was not interested as a purchaser in the way alleged bjr Mr. Logan.”
The letter in question was rightly rejected, for the reason *204that the proof of its genuineness was insufficient. When shown to the witness, and he' was asked if it was a letter he had'received from Col. Potts, he replied: “This is a letter 1 received by mail, and it has the signature of Joseph D. Potts, but I have no knowledge of his signature.” That is about as near as the evidence…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Nicola v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1934
- Clark v. Prov. Tr. Co., TrusteeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Commonwealth v. BassiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Middleton v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Restein v. McCadden & Bro.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.