Potter v. McCoy
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Mifflin county. This was an action of debt by Francis McCoy against John Potter and Charles Colfelt, on the following note, under seal. “ One day after date we promise to pay Francis McCoy, the sum of twelve hundred and seventeen dollars and seventy-four cents, value received.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Mifflin county. This was an action of debt by Francis McCoy against John Potter and Charles Colfelt, on the following note, under seal. “ One day after date we promise to pay Francis McCoy, the sum of twelve hundred and seventeen dollars and seventy-four cents, value received. Witness our hands and seals this 7th day of June, 1848. $1217.74 J. & J. Potter & Colfelt. [Seal.]” John Potter, James Potter, and Charles Colfelt were partners trading under the firm name of “ J. & J. Potter & Colfelt.” This firm was dissolved shortly after the note was given, and its…
1Opinion of the Court
*462The opinion of the court was delivered by
Woodward, J.
The writ issued against John Potter and Charles Colfelt, and all the objections raised on account of the nonjoinder of James Potter, are answered by the remark, that that matter should have been pleaded in abatement. If a person be omitted as defendant, who ought to be joined in any action founded on a joint contract, whether a specialty or not, the objection can only be taken advantage of by a plea in abatement, and though the joint obligation appear to have been written by the party not joined, it is no variance at the trial: 1 Saunders…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Einfeld v. ShermerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Mullen v. McGeaghSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Wickerham v. VitoriSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Dahlstrom v. Taylor, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1926
- First National Bank & Trust Co. of Newtown v. Errico, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County1985