From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hartley v. United Mine Workers of America

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 18, 1955
381 Pa. 430 (Pa. 1955)

Opinion

March 15, 1955.

April 18, 1955.

Agency — Principal and agent — Authority of agent — Unincorporated associations — Officers — Purchase of land — Check for purchase price.

In this suit in assumpsit to recover the amount of defendant union's check delivered to the plaintiff in payment of the purchase price of land bought by the union from the plaintiff, on which check payment was subsequently stopped; and in which it appeared that the principal issue was whether the officers and trustees of the union were without power or authority to purchase the land and that the check was delivered without the direction or authority of the union; and it further appeared from the evidence that such contentions by the defendant were without merit and that the jury had found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff; it was Held that the judgment for the plaintiff should be affirmed.

Mr. Justice MUSMANNO dissented.

Before STERN, C. J., STEARNE, JONES, BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO and ARNOLD, JJ.

Appeal, No. 35, March T., 1955, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Greene County, March T., 1953, No. 64, in case of Josephus Hartley, also known as Joseph Hartley, v. United Mine Workers of America, Robena Local Union No 6321, etc. Judgment affirmed.

Same case below: 2 Pa. D. C.2d 1.

Assumpsit. Before HOOK, P.J.

Verdict for plaintiff and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed.

Anthony Cavalcante, with him Ewing B. Pollock and Pollock Pollock, for appellant.

John I. Hook, Jr., with him Scott Hook, for appellees.


The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge HOOK.


Summaries of

Hartley v. United Mine Workers of America

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 18, 1955
381 Pa. 430 (Pa. 1955)
Case details for

Hartley v. United Mine Workers of America

Case Details

Full title:Hartley v. United Mine Workers of America, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Apr 18, 1955

Citations

381 Pa. 430 (Pa. 1955)
113 A.2d 239

Citing Cases

Walker v. W. C. A. B

Except for . . . conduct of transactions required by statute to be authorized in a particular way, apparent…

Trident Corp. v. Reliance Ins. Co.

nly conclude from this that Trident had submitted all the required paperwork and that it reasonably believed…