Stedman v. Poterie
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY PLAINTIFF FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 122 October Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below No. 145 January Term 1889, C. P. No. 2. To the number and term stated of the court below, Nathan Stedman brought assumpsit against George Poterie, filing a verified statement of claim setting out an account against the defendant, composed of several items.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY PLAINTIFF FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 122 October Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below No. 145 January Term 1889, C. P. No. 2. To the number and term stated of the court below, Nathan Stedman brought assumpsit against George Poterie, filing a verified statement of claim setting out an account against the defendant, composed of several items. The * defendant filed an affidavit of defence to the whole of tbe plaintiff’s claim, whereupon the plaintiff took a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence. Subsequently, the defendant filed…
1Opinion of the Court
OpmioN,
Mb. Justice Mitchell:
The power of courts of Common Pleas to make rules author*107izing tbe entry of judgment for such part of the plaintiff’s demand as is not denied by an affidavit of defence, and proceeding to issue and trial for tbe rest of tbe claim, was established in general by Vanatta v. Anderson, 3 Binn. 417, and a rule directing in the most specific terms just such a course was again sustained in Russell v. Archer, 76 Pa. 473.
The effect of the entry of such a judgment for part of the claim has been passed upon in several cases, and is no longer open to question. In McKinney v.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Vanatta v. AndersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1811
- Steinman v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1847
- Marlin v. WatersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Coleman v. NantzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Commonwealth ex rel. Graham v. McClearySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Andrews v. Blue Ridge Packing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Galveston Dry Dock & Construction Co. v. Standard Dredging Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- City of New Castle v. New Castle Electric Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Taber v. OlmstedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893