Texter v. Wachs

83 Pa. Super. 343, 1924 Pa. Super. LEXIS 139
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedApril 23, 1924
DocketAppeal, 65
StatusPublished

This text of 83 Pa. Super. 343 (Texter v. Wachs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Texter v. Wachs, 83 Pa. Super. 343, 1924 Pa. Super. LEXIS 139 (Pa. Ct. App. 1924).

Opinion

Pee Cueiam,

This is an action of assumpsit to recover on a contract for the erection of a building. The trial resulted in a verdict for plaintiffs. Appellant’s brief states the single question for review as follows: “May a suit be maintained in the name of a partnership where, after the award of the contract, there has been in fact a dissolution of the partnership and the contract carried on by one of the partners on his own responsibility?” Pursuant to Rule 50, we confine our consideration of the record to that point: Garvey v. Thompson, 268 Pa. 353, 355; Kasson v. Water Co., 81 Pa. Superior Ct. 11, 15. The refusal to give binding instructions for defendant is the basis of the assignments of error. Therefore, we take the testimony most favorable to appellees: McDonald v. Pittsburgh, 278 Pa. 485.

There was evidence that on December 28, 1906, plaintiffs, father and son, signed a written contract with *345 defendant; that before the completion of the building, the son went to Panama and the work was completed under the supervision of the father, who testified that the partnership was not dissolved. The payments on the contract were made to H. S. Texter & Son after the son had gone to Panama the same as before his leaving. During the son’s absence, his name was used in the firm’s business and he assumed active duties as a partner upon his return. The question whether the partnership continued to exist after the son went to Panama was submitted to the jury under proper instructions, although that question was not raised by the affidavit of defense. We all agree that the evidence fully warrants a finding by the jury that the partnership was not dissolved.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Kasson v. Rocky Glen Water Co.
81 Pa. Super. 11 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)
Garvey v. Thompson
112 A. 82 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1920)
McDonald v. Pittsburgh
123 A. 467 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
83 Pa. Super. 343, 1924 Pa. Super. LEXIS 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/texter-v-wachs-pasuperct-1924.