Davidson v. Miller
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 30, Oct. T., 1902, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Butler Co., Sept. T., 1900, No. 60, striking off judgment in case of Samuel Davidson and Ellen A. Davidson, his Wife, v. Jacob M. Miller. Rule to strike off judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 30, Oct. T., 1902, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Butler Co., Sept. T., 1900, No. 60, striking off judgment in case of Samuel Davidson and Ellen A. Davidson, his Wife, v. Jacob M. Miller. Rule to strike off judgment. W. D. Brandon, counsel of record for the defendant, presented the following petition: “ That as appears from the record, judgment was entered in this case against the defendant in default of statement and abstract of title on motion of plaintiffs’ attorney in court on Saturday, tbe 28rd inst. “ Your petitioner appeared for defendant and had in preparation (in…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The judgment in this case appears to have been struck off because there was an understanding between counsel that there should be an extension of the time within which the defendant, under the rules of court, was required to file an abstract of title.
This was not ground for striking- off the judgment, but for opening it. A judgment should be struck off only when its irregularity appears on the record. If a defendant has established ground for equitable relief from a judgment regular on its face, the proper practice is to open the judgment.
The order of the court is now modified so…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Fuel City Mfg. Co. v. Waynesburg Products Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Interiors v. Wall of Fame Management Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Spiese v. SheeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Miller Et Ux. v. Michael Morris, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Schneider v. BatesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.