Bunn, Raiguel & Co. v. Ahl
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was a feigned issue, in which Bunn, Raiguel & Co., and others were plaintiffs, and Daniel Ahl, Sr., defendant, to determine whether a certain judgment confessed by Daniel Ahl, Jr., and George W. Ahl to the defendant in this case was collusive or not.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was a feigned issue, in which Bunn, Raiguel & Co., and others were plaintiffs, and Daniel Ahl, Sr., defendant, to determine whether a certain judgment confessed by Daniel Ahl, Jr., and George W. Ahl to the defendant in this case was collusive or not. Daniel Ahl, Jr., and George W. Ahl were sons of the defendant,' and commenced the retail dry goods business at Pittsburgh, in August 1855. In August 1856 this firm was found to be indebted to the plaintiffs and other merchants in the cities of Philadelphia and New York, in a sum of over…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Lowrib, J.
We are of opinion that none of these assignments of error are well founded, except one. Our time would not be well employed for the justification or exposition of any valuable principle, if spent in enlarging upon any of them except the last one. It has caused us some embarrassment, and we may explain the views that we take of it.
In answer to points specially put by the plaintiffs’ counsel, the court had instructed the jury that if the contested judgment was knowingly given for more than was due in order to be used as a means of compelling…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Werner v. ZierfussSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Commonwealth v. BaroniFayette County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1945
- Dalley's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Meyers v. MeyersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Thornburn v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899