Rosenblatt v. Weinman

Citations

• 230 Pa. 536
• 79 A. 710
• 1911 Pa. LEXIS 648

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Indemnity—Profits—Losses—Stock transaction — Practice, C. P. — Sufficiency of statement — Affidavit of defense.</p> <p>1. A contract of indemnity against loss in certain stocks and other securities in consideration of the privilege of sharing in expected profits, wherein no date is fixed for the termination of the contract, gives either party a right to end it at his pleasure providing good faith be observed.</p> <p>2. Where in such a case the party indemnified sues the indemnifier for a sum representing the difference between the cost of the securities and their market rating on the stock exchange on a certain date, claiming that on such date the plaintiff gave positive and unequivocal notice to the defendant of the termination of the contract, the plaintiff is not entitled to judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, when the statement of claim filed admits that notwithstanding the notice of a termination of the contract the plaintiff continued thereafter to hold the securities in his own name, and that they remained unconverted at the time of the bringing of the action, and it is not claimed that the retention of the securities was pursuant to an understanding or agreement with the defendant.</p> <p>3. When a pledgee sells stock upon notice he is disqualified from purchasing the stock.</p> <p>4. To entitle a plaintiff to judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, the statement of the demand under the Act of May 25, 1887, P. L. 271, must be self-sustaining.</p>