Real Silk Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Philadelphia Knitting Mills Co.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of Judge Dickinson in the District Court is as follows:
Under the practice formerly followed in Pennsylvania, the only remedy of a defendant upon whom a return of service of a writ had been made was through an action against the sheriff for a false return. The defendant was not permitted to deny the facts upon which the return of service was made. Of late years, however, the courts, in relief of the officer whose duty it was to serve the writ, have through progressive steps reached a stage in which the facts upon which the service rests may be found by the court.
The facts averred…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Shambe v. Delaware Hudson R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Real Silk Hosiery Mills v. City of PortlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Lobb v. Pennsylvania Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Kraus v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bach v. Friden Calculating MacH. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1948
- Cohen v. American Window Glass Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1941
- Halpert v. ApplebyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- Clements v. MacFadden Publications, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 1989
- Fort Wayne Corrugated Paper Co. v. Anchor Hocking Glass Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1940
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.