Hessel v. Fritz
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR TO THE COURT OB' COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 15 July Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 600 December-Term 1887, C. P. No. 1. On January 11, 1888, upon an affidavit filed with a copy of a lease from James P. Rossiter to Jacob B. Lefevre and Wm.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OB' COMMON PLEAS NO. 1 OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 15 July Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 600 December-Term 1887, C. P. No. 1. On January 11, 1888, upon an affidavit filed with a copy of a lease from James P. Rossiter to Jacob B. Lefevre and Wm. T. Lancaster, the reversion and rental due thereon having been assigned by the lessor to Clinton S. Fritz, and under the authority of a provision in said lease, a judgment in ejectment for the demised premises, to wit, a store-room and cellar at the corner of Tenth and Race streets, was confessed in favor of “ Clinton S.…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Me. Justice Green:
"When the sheriff made return to the rule to show cause why he should not execute the writ of habere facias issued by Fritz, assignee of Rossiter v. Lefevre & Lancaster, he returned that he “ found the premises to be in the possession of one Henry Hessel, who is not a party to the present proceeding, and who claims to hold by a paramount title, as appears by his answer hereto annexed.”
The answer of Hessel to the rule was annexed to the sheriff’s return, and by it it appears that the plaintiff in error was in possession of the premises, not under Lefevre & Lancaster,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Monongahela Valley Camp Meeting Ass'n v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880