Lippincott v. Stringer
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Henderson, J.,
The plaintiff brought an action against the defendant to recover the price of a quantity of lumber alleged to have been contracted for by the defendant, the value of which exceeded $500. The statement of claim recites that the lumber was ordered verbally by telephone on October 13, 1920, and that the plaintiff sent the defendant a confirmation of the order in writing in which was set forth a description of the lumber. The defense presented was that the alleged contract was in parol for merchandise exceeding $500 in value and was therefore unenforceable because of the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wilson v. . Lewiston Mill Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. HowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Porter v. PattersonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1908
3Cited by8 opinions
- Brister & Koester Lumber Corp. v. American Lumber Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Northwestern Consolidated Milling Co. v. AllebachSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Hill v. Marcus & HoltzmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Sall v. Mueller Brass Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Weinroth v. Mill End Cloth. Co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.