Ott v. Sweatman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Ott v. Sweatman

31 A. 102, 166 Pa. 217, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1181

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJanuary 21, 1895

DocketAppeal, No. 6

StatusPublished

Cited by36 cases

This text of 31 A. 102 (Ott v. Sweatman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ott v. Sweatman, 31 A. 102, 166 Pa. 217, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1181 (Pa. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The learned trial judge rightly held that the agreements, between Leiling and Ott constituted a conditional sale and pot a bailment; and hence there was no error in directing a verdict in favor of the defendant in the issue. All that can be profitably said on the controlling question in the case will be found in the able and exhaustive opinion of the court below' on the rule for a new trial. On it we affirm the judgment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam,

The learned trial judge rightly held that the agreements, between Leiling and Ott constituted a conditional sale and pot a bailment; and hence there was no error in directing a verdict in favor of the defendant in the issue. All that can be profitably said on the controlling question in the case will be found in the able and exhaustive opinion of the court below' on the rule for a new trial. On it we affirm the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A. 102, 166 Pa. 217, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ott-v-sweatman-pa-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack