Lehigh V. R. v. Woodring

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Lehigh V. R. v. Woodring, 116 Pa. 513 (Pa. 1887)
19 W.N.C. 372; 9 A. 58; 1887 Pa. LEXIS 418
Clark, Gordon, Green, Mercur, Paxson, Sterrett, Trunkey

Lehigh V. R. v. Woodring

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

The learned judge committed no error in entering judgment in favor of the plaintiff below, on the special verdict. The attempt was to assign that which had no existence, either substantial or incipient. There was no foundation or contract on which an indebtedness might arise. It was the mere possibility of a subsequent acquisition of property. This is too vague and uncertain. It cannot be sustained as a valid assignment and transfer of property: Jermyn v. Moffitt, 75 Penn. St. 402.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
LEHIGH V. R. CO. v. JAMES WOODRING
Cited By
10 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
An assignment of his wages by a laborer, executed when he is not engaged in, and not under contract for, the employment in which the wages are to be earned, is too vague and uncertain to be sustained as a valid assignment and transfer of property: Jermyn v. Moffitt, 75 Penn. St. 403, followed.