Pittsburg Gauge Co. v. Ashton Valve Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 75, Oct. T., 1897, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Dec. T., 1895, No. 572, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit for breach of contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 75, Oct. T., 1897, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Dec. T., 1895, No. 572, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Slagle, J. At the trial it appeared that under the terms of the contract between the parties, the plaintiff was made the exclusive agent for handling the defendant’s safety valves, gauges, etc., in the territory included within the boundary lines drawn between Erie, Pa., on the north; Altoona, Pa., on the east; Cumberland, Md., on the south, and Columbus, O., on the west, for a period of three years, from June 1,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice McCollum,
The contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was for the term of three years from the 1st of June, 1894. It constituted the former sole agent for the sale of certain goods of the latter within the territory defined by it. The compensation fixed for the services to be rendered was a commission of ten per cent on the amount of the sales. On September 30, 1895, the defendant mailed a notice to the plaintiff of its intention to annul the contract on November 1, which notice was received by the plaintiff on October 2. This intention was carried out in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reiter v. MortonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
3Cited by14 opinions
- Manss-Owens Co. v. H. S. Owens & SonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1921
- Macan v. Scandinavia Belting Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Wilson v. WernwagSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Emerson v. Pacific Coast & Norway Packing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Commonwealth Trust Co. v. Hachmeister Lind Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.