Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Braddock Wire Co.

25 A. 749, 155 Pa. 22, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1171
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 3, 1893·No. Appeal, No. 79·Published·Cited by 27 cases

Opinion

Pee Ctjeiam,

The principal contention in this ease was, whether, under the contract of 1889 the tonnage on which the gas bills were based was upon the steel billets that were used, that is, the raw material, or the product of it. The learned judge below instructed the jury that the tonnage was to be based upon the product. The able argument of appellant’s counsel has failed to satisfy us that this instruction was erroneous.

[25] There were a number of other items in plaintiff’s claim, which it is alleged were not included in the contract, and for which the defendant company should pay. Some of these claims were sustained in part by the learned judge of the court below and others were submitted to the jury under fair instructions. We do not think it is necessary to discuss them in detail. The appellant complains of that portion of the charge of the learned judge, embodied in the seventh specification, in which he refers to the course of dealing between these parties. We do not think this reference objectionable. It was used to illustrate the construction placed upon this contract by the parties themselves ; when we are asked to say what the parties meant or intended by their contract, it is entirely safe to point to their own construction of it, as evidenced by their course of dealing under it.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Braddock Wire Co., 25 A. 749, 155 Pa. 22, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1171 (Pa. 1893).

25 A. 749 (Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. Braddock Wire Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bressi v. Dobroth
74 Pa. D. & C.2d 705 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1975)
Ryan v. Hudak
185 A.2d 570 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1962)
Gloeckner v. Baldwin Township School District
175 A.2d 73 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1961)
Carr Estate
19 Pa. D. & C.2d 705 (Philadelphia County Orphans' Court, 1959)
Hand Estate
121 A.2d 452 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1956)
Foulke v. Miller
112 A.2d 124 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1955)
Commonwealth v. Henry W. Horst Co.
72 A.2d 131 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1950)
Birdsall-Friedman Co. v. Globe & Rutgers Insurance
190 A. 924 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
Alpha Claude Neon Corp. v. Pennsylvania Distilling Co.
188 A. 825 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Bender v. Wiggins
185 A. 730 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Continental Guaranty Corp. v. Jacobs
2 Pa. D. & C. 572 (Berks County Court of Common Pleas, 1922)
Fisher v. Ronemus
110 A. 87 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1920)
Beedy v. Nypano Railroad
95 A. 343 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Lehigh Valley Coal Co. v. Heirs
94 A. 74 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Myers' Estate
86 A. 89 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1913)
Standiford v. Kloman
83 A. 311 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1912)
Ramble v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.
47 Pa. Super. 28 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Howell's Estate
80 A. 58 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Commonwealth v. Huston
46 Pa. Super. 172 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)