Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1810, Vol. 2 Jackson a. The Commonwealth, Johnson, The Commonwealth v John, Wilson 6. Jones, Insurance Co. N. A. V. K Kelly, Guier v. Foster, Kennedy', Gordon b Kirk v. Dean, Knox Work. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Vol. 2 It is said the rent is uncertain, and, therefore, Jones had no ri ht to distrain. In Go. Litt. 96, a, the principle which governs this case is clearly stated. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1812, Vol. 4 Hall for the defendants in error did not deny the importance of the consideration to a deed of bargain and sale; but he said the plaintiffs in error had now placed themselves in the situation of persons asking for a specific performance; and as the court must be satisfied from examining the notes of the trial and the judge's charge, that Quigley had been guilty of shuffling and prevarication to avoid paying for the land, they would not give him the benefit of the objection which had been raised. In reply it was said, that the question did not turn upon the propriety of a specific performance, but upon the point, whether the judge had erred in law in his charge to the jury. If the judgment is affirmed, the opinion of the judge upon all points on which it was delivered, is declared to be good. Tilghhan, C. J. This is a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Northumberland county, founded on the opinion of the president of that court reduced to writing, and filed according to the act of assembly. The plaintiffs had sold to Christopher Quigley one of the defendants a tract of land, for which he had paid a small part of the consideration money, and entered into possession in the year 1791. In 1795, the agents of the plaintiffs tendered to Quigley a deed of conveyance, and demanded payment of the balance of the money. Quigley refused to accept the deed; in consequence of which, the plaintiffs considered the contract as void, and brought this ejectment. Several objections were made to the opinion delivered by the president. I shall take notice of only one of them, because it is decisive. The deed tendered by the plaintiffs was executed by five persons, three of whom were men, and two, married women. It was acknowledged according to law, but there was a blank left for the consideration. There was evidence, that the agent of the plaintiffs was authorized by them to fill up this blank. Under these circumstances, the president of the Court of Common Pleas was of opinion, that the deed was sufficient. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1845, Vol. 9 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1845, by thomas davis, In the Clerk's Ofiice of the District Court, of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1889, Vol. 17 An action does not lie upon the sentence of the Court of Quarter Sessions on a conviction of fornication and bastardy, ordering a weekly allowance for the maintenance of the bastard child: the only means of enforcing the sentence is by a commitment in execution. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1809, Vol. 3 This is an indictment for perjury. Barlow was convicted in the court of Quarter Sessions of Luzerne county, and judgment was given in November 1806, that he should be imprisoned at hard labour, &c. for two years in the gaol of the county of Philadelphia, and pay a fine of ten dollars. The error assigned is, in that part of the judgment which directs the imprisonment to be in the county of Philadelphia. By the 4th section of the act of 5th April 1790, intitled "An act to reform the penal laws of this state," every person convicted of an offence, for which by the laws in force before the act intitled "An act to amend the penal laws of "this state," burning in the hand, cutting off the ears, nailing the car or cars to the pillory, placing in and upon the pillory, whipping or imprisonment for life may be inflicted, shall, instead of such parts of the punishment, be confined and kept at hard labour, &c. for any term not exceeding two years at the discretion of the court. This general description includes the crime of perjury. By the 28th section of the same act, the malefactors sentenced to hard labour in the several counties of this state, other than the county of Philadelphia, shall be employed in the several gaols and workhouses of the respective counties in which they were convicted; but by the 34th section of the same act, any felon convicted in any county, other than the county of Philadelphia, of any felony, for which he shall be sentenced to hard labour for the space of twelve months or upwards, may, at the discretion of the court before whom he shall be convicted, within three months after such conviction be removed to the gaol in the county of Philadelphia, and therein be confined at hard labour, &c. By the act of 21st March 1806, the court before whom any person is convicted of felony or larceny, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment at hard labour, &c. for any term not exceeding three years, may direct the imprisonment, &c. to be in the gaol of any county within the commonwealth, or in the gaol and penitentiary of Philadelphia. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Vol. 2: Containing the Cases Decided in Part of July Term, in September Term, and Part of December Term, 1841 When a purchaser at a store selects the articles he wants, and has them set aside to be sent for by him, or to be sent to him by the merchant, then is the time to make the entry of a charge against the purchaser; and such entry is evidence. If a factor sell goods in his own name, without the buyer's knowledge of the capacity in which he is acting, the owner may maintain an action for the price of the goods in his own name; and in such case the purchaser may set off a debt due to him by the factor. If, in such case, the purchaser knew of the capacity in which the seller acted, then, in an action by the principal against him for the price of the goods, he can not set off a debt due to him by the factor. Error to the Common Pleas of Columbia county. Samuel Parker against William Donaldson. This was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered; to support which, the plaintiff offered in evidence his book of original entries, after giving the following evidence: Hugh Smith sworn. I am a clerk of Mr Samuel Parker, of Philadelphia. He is a grocer. I was in his employment in April 1838. This book produced here is the book of original entries of Samuel Parker. This entry, dated April 27th 1838, is my handwriting. It was made on that date. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Reports of cases argued and adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania - Vol. 2 is an unchanged, high-quality reprint of the original edition of 1880. Hansebooks is editor of the literature on different topic areas such as research and science, travel and expeditions, cooking and nutrition, medicine, and other genres. As a publisher we focus on the preservation of historical literature. Many works of historical writers and scientists are available today as antiques only. Hansebooks newly publishes these books and contributes to the preservation of literature which has become rare and historical knowledge for the future.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases, Vol. 15: Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; With a General Index, and Table of Cases It appeared on the record, that the plaintiff prayed a writ of retorno habendo, which had been issued. Penrose, for the plaintiff in error. 1. The description is too vague. A lot of sundries means a portion. He has got a judgment for a portion. He can have return only of what he has judgment for. It is is not certain even to a general intent. 1 Chitty PI. 237. Certainty, to a general intent, is that which makes the matter certain without recurring to possible facts, which do not appear. Here there is no certainty, without such recurrence. 2 Wheat. Selwyn, 914, - "divers goods and chattels," insufficient. 2. As to assessing the damages, at the amount of the plaintiff's claim. Here the value of the property was submitted, as the standard; but this was to be estimated by a fictitious standard. Penrod v. Mitchell, (S Serg. & Rawle, 522, ) is precisely this case. Alexander, contra. 1. When facts are equally in the knowledge of both parties, there is not the same necessity for certainty. 6 Cornyn's Dig. Tit. Pleader, C. 36. As to the difference between judgment by default and a demurrer, - here the plaintiff substantially showed a good title; but it is cured by pleading over and verdict. 6 Com. Digest, 63. Pleader, C. 32. Where words not actionable are joined with those that are, the court will intend that the damages are given only for the actionable words. Here there were other goods well described; and some intendment must be made. If the defendant had demurred, the plaintiff would have been entitled to judgment for what is good. 2 Com. 495. Pleading, 3 K. 10. 2. Penrod v. Mitchell, bears out the charge. The value of the property given is the measure. The jury were directed not to go beyond the plaintiff's demand. The opinion of the court, (Tilghman, C. J., absent, ) was delivered by Rogers, J. The defendant has assigned for error, that the description in the declaration, viz. that part of it which spoke of a lot of sundries, was too general. The declaration, in this case, would undoubtedly have been ill on demurrer; but then, upon the error being pointed out, the court under our act of assembly, would have given leave to amend. What would have been the effect of a demurrer, whether the plaintiff would have been entitled to a judgment on that part of the declaration, which is good, it is unnecessary here to determine, 6 Com. Dig. Title Pleader, C. No. 32, Page 63. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Excerpt from Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Vol. 8: Containing the Cases Decided in Part of September Term, and in December Term 1844, and in March Term 1845 "H. H. Budd, Esq., please pay over to William Wheelen or order the amount of the note on John Hawkins when collected, as the note is to be applied to the payment on a note in the Warren Bank; or if said Drums and Collins should pay off said note, this order to be lifted. The following is endorsed on the back of the above writing: "Accept the within order, and agree to pay over the same when collected, reserving my fees and percentage. The court below (Thompson, President) rendered a judgment for the defendant. Stephenson, for plaintiff in error. Pearson, for defendant in error. Per Curiam. - An equitable assignment is an agreement in the nature of a declaration of trust, which a chancellor, though deaf to the prayer of a volunteer, never hesitates to execute when it has been made on valuable, or even good consideration. Could there be a more explicit declaration than the order before us? Drum and Collins draw on their lawyer for the proceeds of an action against Hawkins, which they declare in the order to have been appropriated to payment of their note in the Warren Bank, on which Wheelen, the payee, was one of their sureties. If this appropriation was a condition of the contract of suretyship, it rested on a valuable consideration; if it was not, it rested on a good one, which is equally available. Drum and Collins were bound to secure Wheelen by putting funds into his hands to take up the paper at maturity, if they should not; and in giving this order they yielded to a moral obligation, which is a consideration for an express contract. The appropriation, then, being complete as an assignment of the fund by the agreement of the parties, even without the acceptance of the drawee, could not be revoked. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
