Bowman v. Robb
6 Pa. 302
Opinion
There were actually two seals on the face of each note — the one made by a printed stamp, and the other by an exterior circumflex of a pen. But even if that were not so, there was intrinsic evidence that Bowman had adopted the seal as it stood upon the paper, and the jury might possibly have disregarded the extrinsic evidence, had the two been incompatible. Let the judgment be affirmed for the reasons given in the charge.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bowman v. Robb, 6 Pa. 302 (Pa. 1847).
6 Pa. 302 (Bowman v. Robb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lundvall v. Camp Hill School District
58 Pa. D. & C.2d 643 (Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas, 1972)
Brisbin v. Bogoly
39 A.2d 430 (U.S. District Court, 1944)
Hess's Estate
24 A. 676 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1892)