Hill v. Crawford
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. THE plaintiff in error, Alexander Hill, brought an acllón on the case, in the Common Pleas of Butler against Josiah Crawford, the defendant in error, which referred to arbitration. The arbitrators filed a report in vour of the defendant, and awarded the sum of four hundred and nine dollars, sixty-seven cents to be due to-him.
Read the full summary
In Error. THE plaintiff in error, Alexander Hill, brought an acllón on the case, in the Common Pleas of Butler against Josiah Crawford, the defendant in error, which referred to arbitration. The arbitrators filed a report in vour of the defendant, and awarded the sum of four hundred and nine dollars, sixty-seven cents to be due to-him. Judgment having been entered on the award, Crawford issued a scirefacias upon it against Hill, in which a rule of arbitration was entered by the plaintiff in the scire facias, under the Act of 20th March, 1810, in pursuance of which, arbitrators were appointed,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.' —
The only question is, whether, on a scire facias on a judgment on the report of arbitrators, the suit may be carried before arbitrators without the consent of the- defendant, by virtue of the “ Act regulating arbitrations,” passed the 20th March, 1810. The words of the Act extend .to all civil suits or actions. A scire facias on a judgment is undoubtedly a civil suit; and the only plausible objection urged by the defendant is, that if issue had been joined on a plea of nul tiel record, it would not. have been proper to take the cause from the decision of the Court, and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Stevenson v. DochertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834