Jacobs v. Heppe

Citations

• 29 Pa. Super. 406
• 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 343

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Evidence—Conflicting evidence — Question for the jury.</p> <p>In. an action on a contract the evidence showed that the defendants were dealers in pianos, and that they agreed with the plaintiff that if she should give them a “prospect,” that is, the name and address of a prospective purchaser of a piano, and the defendants should in pursuance of the “prospect” or information, within a reasonable time succeed in selling a piano to such prospective purchaser, the plaintiff would be entitled to receive ten per cent of the purchase price paid. Plaintiff claimed that through a “prospect” given by her, defendants had sold three pianos six or seven months subsequently. The defendants denied that the sale had been made through plaintiff’s “prospect.” Held, that the case was for the jury and that a judgment and verdict for the plaintiff should be sustained.</p> <p>Where there is any evidence which alone justifies an inference of a disputed fact, it must go to the jury, and this is generally true, whether the sufficiency of the evidence is raised upon a motion for a nonsuit, or at the conclusion of the trial in which the defendant has introduced countervailing evidence of a positive character. ' ■</p>