Skip to main content
· 5/30/1895

Eshleman v. Lightner

Citations

  • 169 Pa. 46
  • 32 A. 63
  • 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1066

Syllabus

<p>Sate — Warranty.</p> <p>Where the sole defense to an action for money due for the purchase of a horse was a warranty of the horse and a breach thereof, evidence that, upon discovering the breach, defendant rescinded the sale and returned the horse to plaintiff, was not admissible.</p>

Judges: Dean, Fell, Mitchell, Sterrett, 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.