Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

127 Pa. 20

Gates v. Watt

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 27, 1889

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1889-05-27

No. 44 January Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 401 May Term 1888, C. P. On April 20, 1888, an action of assumpsit was brought by C. F. Watt and J. B. McElwaine, lately trading as Watt & McElwaine, now to the use of J. B. McElwaine, against Charles Sipler, John J. Ashbaugh, Joseph Gates and Eli Logue, partners, lately trading as Sipler, Ashbaugh & Co. Joseph Gates alone was served, and to the plaintiffs’ narr in the common counts, to which was attached a copy of a book…

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1903

2 state decisions

Relies on Battles v. Sliney

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1889-05-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam:

¶1The first assignment is not in conformity to the Pules of Court, and will not be considered. See Battles v. Sliney, decided at this term [126 Pa. 460]. The remaining assignments refer to the rulings of the court below. By the defendant’s second point the learned judge was asked to instruct the jury that “ There is no evidence to warrant or justify the jury in finding that at any time prior to the first of February, 1877, or at any other time, the defendants, Ashbaugh, Gates and Logue, were copartners of Sipler, as alleged in plaintiffs’ pleadings.” The court declined to affirm this point. This is the pinch of the case. While the evidence of the partnership was not strong, there was evidence, and more than a scintilla; enough to carry the case to the jury. If the verdict was against the weight of the evidence upon this point, the only remedy was to ask the court below to set it aside for that reason. There is no remedy here. We find no error in the rulings of the court.

¶2Judgment affirmed.

/127/pa/20 · .json · Public domain