Skip to main content
· 3/9/1896

Clemens v. Price

Citations

  • 174 Pa. 306
  • 34 A. 561
  • 1896 Pa. LEXIS 883

Syllabus

<p>Sale — Delivery—Fraud—Change of possession.</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for the wrongful levy and sale of plaintiff’s goods, the evidence showed that the goods were sold as the property of plaintiff’s father; that plaintiff lived with his father, and worked in his shop for wages; that intending to go into business on his own account he had gradually accumulated a stock of leather and harness for that purpose ; that a part of the goods were purchased directly by the plaintiff in his own name, and paid for by him; and a part was included in orders sent by his father, and on their receipt the plaintiff’s share was turned over to him, and the price charged against the wages duo him. The goods were left in the father’s store, but not mingled with his stock. Held, that a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff should be sustained.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • district’s conduct constituted a demotion, which was appealable to the Secretary of Education rather than court of common pleas; trial court should have transferred case to Secretary of Education upon determining it lacked jurisdiction over appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dean, Fell, Green, Stekrett, Williams

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.