Skip to main content
· 1/29/1894

Frishmuth v. Barker

Citations

  • 159 Pa. 549
  • 28 A. 368
  • 1894 Pa. LEXIS 893

Syllabus

<p>Affidavit of defence — Contract—Misrepresentations.</p> <p>In an action of assumpsit to recover money paid for an interest in alleged valuable banking concessions from the Chinese government, an affidavit of defence is sufficient to prevent judgment which avers that the concessions were in actual existence at the time of plaintiff’s purchase; that plaintiff personally examined and read the concessions; that a special trust was formed with the knowledge and consent of plaintiff, and certificates of plaintiff’s interest therein were issued by the trust, and were always ready for delivery to him; that after the trust was created the concessions were revoked by the Chinese government; that plaintiff’s money had been applied to expenses incurred; and that defendant made no misrepresentation concerning the transaction.</p>

How courts have described this case

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

  • The law \requires that the driver be under arrest at the time chemical testing is refused. No magic words are required[.]\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett

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.