Rundell v. Kalbfus

Citations

• 125 Pa. 123
• 17 A. 238
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 699

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action against two or more, in case in the nature of a conspiracy, if the tort be actionable whether committed, by one or more, recovery may be had against but one; but if the tort be actionable only when committed by two or more, recovery may not bo had unless the unlawful conspiracy be established: Collins v. Cronin, 117 Pa. 35.</p> <p>2. If a defendant, impleaded with others in an action for conspiracy, while acting as the agent of plaintiffs to buy hay for thorn turned over the hay when bought witli plaintiff’s money to his co-defendants, he was acting in bad faith and recovery may be had against him alone for the loss sustained thereby.</p> <p>3. “If the declaration had been printed we could have formed an intelligent opinion as to whether the tort in this case was of such a nature that all the defendants must have participated therein. It is becoming a too common practice to omit the pleadings from the paper books of the plaint iff in error; in all such oases we must assume that they sustain the verdict: ” per Mr. Chief Justice Paxson.</p> <p>4. Where in an action for conspiracy against plaintiffs’ agent and two others, a former recovery in assumpsit by the agent’s co-defendants alone against the plaintiffs in the action of conspiracy where such recovery is pleaded, will not avail as a plea in bar, the record showing that not only the cause of action but the parties were not the same.</p>