Jennings v. Hare
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Allegheny county: Of October Term 1883, No. 155. Debt, on a joint and several property bond in replevin, by John IT. Hare, sheriff, for use of James McKay, against John Jennings, Israel Painter and Alfred Patterson, said .Painter and Patterson being sureties of J minings. The death of Painter being suggested, his administrators c. t. a. were substituted on the record, and a scire facias was duly served on them.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Allegheny county: Of October Term 1883, No. 155. Debt, on a joint and several property bond in replevin, by John IT. Hare, sheriff, for use of James McKay, against John Jennings, Israel Painter and Alfred Patterson, said .Painter and Patterson being sureties of J minings. The death of Painter being suggested, his administrators c. t. a. were substituted on the record, and a scire facias was duly served on them. Plea, payment with leave, and a special plea setting forth the following facts : that in 1874, McKay brought an action of repleviu in…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gordon
In the case of Good v. Good, 9 Watts 567, Chief Justice Gibson, in speaking of the difference in the practice under the British statute of defalcation and our own, says, that where the defendant, on the trial of the case, follows up his notice of set-off with the requisite'proof to sustain it, as well in the courts of Westminster, as here, he is concluded by the verdict. But that the residue of a set off, not exhausted in extinguishing the opposite demand, not being recoverable, as with us, by the same jury, is by the British practice, reserved for recovery by a future action, or defalcation,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Good v. GoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840