Siegert v. Servel, Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Siegert v. Servel, Inc.

42 A.2d 589, 352 Pa. 316, 1945 Pa. LEXIS 437

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 12, 1945

DocketAppeal, 213

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 42 A.2d 589 (Siegert v. Servel, Inc.) 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

Siegert v. Servel, Inc., 42 A.2d 589, 352 Pa. 316, 1945 Pa. LEXIS 437 (Pa. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

There is no merit in this appeal. The action arose out of a disagreement concerning the meaning of certain terms in a written contract, prepared and entered into by the parties with the greatest care. Plaintiff contends that the agreement is a divisible one. Defendant insists that the contract in its general features is entire. The learned court below, interpreting the contract as a matter of law, as it was bound to do, found that the contract is entire and indivisible, and that such was the manifest intention of the parties. We are of the same opinion. Huselton v. Eddie Bald M. Car Co., 81 Pa. Superior Ct. 526. A decision on this point decides the appeal. The facts and law of the case are considered in detail in the able opinion of Judge Smith of the learned court below.

Judgment affirmed; costs to be paid by appellant.

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

Per Curiam,

There is no merit in this appeal. The action arose out of a disagreement concerning the meaning of certain terms in a written contract, prepared and entered into by the parties with the greatest care. Plaintiff contends that the agreement is a divisible one. Defendant insists that the contract in its general features is entire. The learned court below, interpreting the contract as a matter of law, as it was bound to do, found that the contract is entire and indivisible, and that such was the manifest intention of the parties. We are of the same opinion. Huselton v. Eddie Bald M. Car Co., 81 Pa. Superior Ct. 526. A decision on this point decides the appeal. The facts and law of the case are considered in detail in the able opinion of Judge Smith of the learned court below.

Judgment affirmed; costs to be paid by appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.2d 589, 352 Pa. 316, 1945 Pa. LEXIS 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/siegert-v-servel-inc-pa-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack