Hurwitz v. Kelly

Citations

• 28 Pa. Super. 104
• 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 145

Syllabus

<p>Sale — Fraud—Evidence—Question for jury.</p> <p>In an action of trespass where it appeared that the plaintiffs had purchased a stock of goods from a firm which had subsequently become insolvent, and whose partners absconded, and that the defendants were a constable and creditors who had seized the goods in the possession of the plaintiffs, a verdict for plaintiffs will not be reversed where the court fairly submitted the question of plaintiff’s previous knowledge and intended fraud in such a manner that if found against the plaintiffs, there could not have been a recovery.</p> <p>In such a case where the evidence shows that the defendants acted in concert and in furtherance of a common purpose, they are liable jointly, if liable at all.</p>