Scott Manufacturing Co. v. Morgan
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 394, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Montgomery Co., June T., 1906, No. 53, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Scott Manufacturing Company v. George C. Morgan. Scire facias sur mechanic’s lien. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This was not a case for a summary judgment. As said by the learned judge below “ the defenses set up are numerous and somewhat confused,” but it is by no means clear that several of them do not raise questions of fact as well as law that require a jury; as, for example, whether the machinery in question is a proper subject of mechanic’s lien, and whether it was furnished on the credit of the building or on the personal credit of the purchaser. While it is true, as the court remarked, that a creditor may have more than one lien for the same debt yet a sale of materials on personal…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Columbia National Bank v. DunnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- N. Green & Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Hommel v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
- Presbyterian Church v. AllisonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849
- Barclay v. WainwrightSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bernhardt v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Seelar v. East End Mantel & Tile Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Doll v. Crooks, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Cameron County1933
- Edwards v. Stevens, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Chester County1977
- Scranton City v. WatsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.