Altoona Concrete Construction & Supply Co. v. Knickerbocker Contracting Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 5, Oct. T., 1905, by defendant, from order of C. P. Blair Co., Oct. T., 1904, No. 50, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of The Altoona Concrete Construction and Supply Company v. Knickerbocker Contracting Company. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The opinion of the Superior Court sets forth the averments of the statement of claim, and of the affidavit of defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 5, Oct. T., 1905, by defendant, from order of C. P. Blair Co., Oct. T., 1904, No. 50, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of The Altoona Concrete Construction and Supply Company v. Knickerbocker Contracting Company. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The opinion of the Superior Court sets forth the averments of the statement of claim, and of the affidavit of defense. The court made absolute the rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
This appeal is from the judgment of the court below, entered for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
The first item in the plaintiff’s statement of claim is “June 2. 160 Pcs. 2x8-14........$53.80.”
There are ten or twelve similar entries under different dates. If “ Pcs.” is an abbreviation for pieces, of what were they pieces ? *513Assuming that they were lumber, although the statement claims for goods, wares and merchandise, etc., delivered, what kind of lumber — hemlock, pine, oak, maple, walnut or mahogany ? What information is there upon this subject in the items…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Leek v. Livingston Manor Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Davis v. KomerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912