Legal Opinion

Geary v. Schwem

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 12, 1924No. Appeal, No. 285PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Simpson,

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment for defendant, on questions of law raised by the affidavit of defense. Under such circumstances, all the averments of the statement of claim must be taken as true, and the judgment should not be sustained, unless, from the facts averred, *438it appears, as a conclusion of law, that plaintiff cannot possibly recover: Rhodes v. Terheyden, 272 Pa. 397. In this light we will determine the appeal.

Before the passage of the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and of the National Prohibition Act, defendant had been…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Rhodes v. TerheydenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Marbury v. BrooksSupreme Court of the United States · 1822
  3. Holt v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
  4. First National Bank v. BaerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  5. Heath v. PageSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Gray v. Phila. & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Sun Ray Drug Co. v. LawlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Davis v. Investment Land Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  4. Smith v. WhitmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1963
  5. Thomas v. Employers Liability Assurance Corp. Ltd. of LondonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API