Case Name: Moffatt v. Wetherill et al., Appellants
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1928-12-13
Citations: 95 Pa. Super. 45
Docket Number: Appeal No. 299
Parties: Moffatt v. Wetherill et al., Appellants.
Judges: Before Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop and Cunningham, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 45–47

Head Matter:
Moffatt v. Wetherill et al., Appellants.
Argued November 13, 1928.
Before Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop and Cunningham, JJ.
Henry L. Schmipf, Jr., and with him Hyman Lebovitz and William A. Carr, for appellants.
H. Rook Goshorn, for appellee.
December 13, 1928:

Opinion:
Opinion by
Linn, .J.,
Plaintiff has judgment, after a trial by a judge without a jury, in a suit on a promissory note made by defendant partnership. The note was given by defendant to plaintiff for hi's interest in what had theretofore been a partnership composed of himself and the two members of defendant firm.
In appellant's brief it is said: "The case is a clear-cut issue of credibility." The evidence need not be stated. The dispute turned on whether the parties had made an error of $1,000' in striking the balance payable to plaintiff for his interest on retiring; there was evidence both ways; the fact was found against defendant by the judge who, it was' agreed, should find the facts; defendant, as well as this court, is bound by the result which is responsive to the issues on which evidence was offered.
Judgment affirmed.