Paxson & Comfort Co. v. Potter
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 13, Oct. T., 1905, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1902, No. 745, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of The Paxson & Comfort Company v. Joseph Potter. Assumpsit for rent. The opinion of the Superior Court states the facts. Error assigned was order for judgment.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Henderson, J.,
The lease under which the defendant held was for the fourth floor of the buildings, Nos. 529 and 531 Arch street, and 524, *616526 and 528 Cherry street in the city of Philadelphia. The plaintiff’s action is for rent for one month, which became due February 26, 1902. It is alleged in the affidavit of defense that premises 526 and 528 Cherry street were totally destroyed by fire and 524 Cherry street was damaged by fire on December 27, 1901. It is also averred that the plaintiff leased so much of the demised premises as had not been destroyed to other tenants soon after…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Graves v. . BerdanNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Ainsworth v. Mount Moriah Lodge, Ancient, Free, & Accepted MasonsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
3Cited by14 opinions
- Albert M. Greenfield & Co., Inc. v. KoleaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Moving Picture Co. of America v. Scottish Union & National InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Solomon v. Neisner Bros.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
- Peirce v. HoffstotSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Japhet v. PolemanakosCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.