Washington Times Co. v. Wilder
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal by the defendant from a judgment under the 73d Rule, for want of a sufficient affidavit, of defense, in an action on promissory notes. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Alvey
This is another of many cases that have been brought into this court on appeal froth judgments rendered under the Seventy-third Rule of the court below. It is necessary to determine whether the affidavit filed on the part of the plaintiffs be sufficient, and if so, whether the affidavit of defence, filed with the defendant’s pleas, be such as gratifies the requirement of the rule.
*63The action was brought on two promissory notes, each for $2,000, professing on their face to have been made by the defendant, The Washington Times Company, through and by their manager, S. M. Goldsmith. The notes…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Grant v. George C. Treadwell Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sachs v. EwingCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943