Fulton v. Peters
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Fulton v. Peters, 137 Pa. 613 (Pa. 1890)
20 A. 936; 1890 Pa. LEXIS 1003
Clark, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams
Fulton v. Peters
Opinion of the Court
FULTON V. PETERS.
The plaintiff complains, (a) that the learned court erred in reserving as a question of law the third point presented by defendants ; and (&) that the court erred in entering judgment for defendants, non obstante veredicto, on such reserved point. We cannot sustain either objection. There was no exception to the reservation of the point, and for anything that appears
Judgment affirmed.
FULTON V. METZGAR.
This case is identical with Fulton v. Peters, supra, in everything.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- JAMES FULTON v. JAMES PETERS JAMES FULTON v. MARGARET METZGAR
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Where a point presented for instruction is reserved as a question of law, without exception taken in the court below, a specification alleging error in entering judgment for the defendant non obstante veredicto, on the question reserved, cannot be considered. 2. A building contract providing for the submission of any dispute as to the quality or quantity of the work to a superintendent whose decision-should be final, the contractor is estopped from recovering a disputed claim which he refused to submit to the superintendent: Per Hunter, P. J.