Bowman v. Berkey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 125, Oct. T., 1917, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Cambria Co., Dec. T., 1914, No. 397, opening a judgment, in case of Polly A. Bowman v. Jerry Berkey and W. S. Krise. Petition for rule to open judgment. Before O’Con-nor, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. The court opened the judgment. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Frazer,
The court below made absolute a rule to show cause why judgment entered against defendant under a warrant of attorney contained in a note should not be opened. Plaintiff appealed. The question for our determination is whether or not the action of the court was a proper exercise of its discretion under the evidence produced: Kelber v. Pittsburgh National Plow Co., 146 Pa. 485; Wright v. Linhart, 243 Pa. 221.
Under date of April 1, 1908, Franklin B. Ótt, Jerry Berkey and W. S. Krise, executed a note to plaintiff for $2,500, payable to the order of plaintiff and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kelber v. Pittsb. N. Plow Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1892
- Williams v. NotopolosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Simpson v. StackhouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848
- Robinson v. MyersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- Wright v. LinhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Boileau v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- Rome Sales & Service Station v. FinchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Miller Et Ux. v. Michael Morris, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Miller Election Contest CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Molden WillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.