Solomon v. Moyer

Citations

• 71 Pa. Super. 4
• 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 457

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Illegal contract — Bcmh cashier — Transaction of business — Single transaction — Act of March SI, 1860, Sec. 64, P. L. S99.</p> <p>In an action .against a bank cashier to recover damages for the breach of a contract entered into as a single transaction to purchase one thousand gallons of toluol, the defendant cannot set up as a defense the provisions of the Act of March 31, 1860, Sec. 64, P. L. 399, which forbids the cashier of a bank to engage “in any other profession, occupation, or calling, other than that of his duties of cashier.”</p> <p>It was not the purpose of the Act of March 31, 1860, Sec. 64, P. L. 399, to prescribe .as law that a cashier engaging in any single transaction would be brought within the terms of the act. It has reference to a general occupation, profession or calling by which one usually gets his living.</p>