Kirkpatrick v. Hopkins
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
IN this case (S. ’38, 696,) the plaintiff had filed a copy of his book entries, and on the third Saturday after the return day, took judgment for want of an affidavit of defence.
Read the full summary
IN this case (S. ’38, 696,) the plaintiff had filed a copy of his book entries, and on the third Saturday after the return day, took judgment for want of an affidavit of defence. On the same day, but before the rendition of the judgment, the defendant’s attorney entered an appearance, and filed a petition purporting to be of the defendant, signed however by his attorney, praying for a removal of the cause to the Circuit Court of the United States for this district, under the 12th section of the act of Congress of Sept. 24, 1789, establishing the judiciary, (1 Story’s Laws U. S. 57, 58.) The…
1Opinion of the Court
Pbr Curiam.—
the defendant had complied with the requisitions of the act of Congress, we should entertain this application favourably. But he has not complied in two particulars. The petition is not signed by him, nor “ at the time of entering his appearance,” did he offer the surety required by the act. See 2 Troubat and Haly 533.
Rule discharged.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Shaft v. . Phoenix Mutual Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Best v. New York Life Ins.Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati · 1872
- Fisk v. Union Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1871
- Robinson v. PotterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1861