Legal Opinion

Brogan v. Bright-Brooks Lumber Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 18, 1939No. Appeal, 368PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Stadtfeld, J.,

This is an appeal by defendant from the order of the court below, discharging a rule ex parte defendant to show cause why the writ of attachment in a foreign attachment proceeding should not be quashed.

The opinion of the court below correctly sets forth a summary of the proceedings and from which we quote: “On May 26, 1939, the plaintiff commenced this action of foreign attachment in assumpsit. An appearance was entered for the garnishee and on August 9, 1939, the garnishee’s attorney filed a rule on the plaintiff to show cause why the attachment should not be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Pasquinelli v. Southern Macaroni Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Davis v. Investment Land Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  3. Konopka Et Ux. v. McAteerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  4. First National Bank of Omaha v. CrosbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  5. Nazareth Cement Co. v. Union Indemnity Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. North American Properties, Ltd. v. Pocono Farms Lot Owners Ass'nDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. General Maintenance Engineers, Inc. v. Pacific Vegetable Oil Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  3. Chelmsford Worsted Co. v. Ria Herlinger Fabrics, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1948
  4. Greenwald v. Murvin, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Chester County1963
  5. Thalheimer v. Vineland Construction Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1949

1 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