Zeigler v. Sprenkle
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Mams county. This was an action of debt by the Commonwealth for the use of Charles Sprengle against George Zeigler, Jacob Zeigler, Ephraim Martin, and David Zeigler, founded on the official bond of George and Jacob Zeigler, administrators de bonis non cum testamento annexo of Daniel Sprenkle, wherein the other two defendants were sureties. The defendants pleaded covenants performed and nil debent..
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Mams county. This was an action of debt by the Commonwealth for the use of Charles Sprengle against George Zeigler, Jacob Zeigler, Ephraim Martin, and David Zeigler, founded on the official bond of George and Jacob Zeigler, administrators de bonis non cum testamento annexo of Daniel Sprenkle, wherein the other two defendants were sureties. The defendants pleaded covenants performed and nil debent.. The plaintiff offered in evidence the bond of the defendants in the penalty of three thousand dollars, with the following condition :—“ The condition of this obligation…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Kennedy, J.
The plaintiffs in error were the defendants in the court below in this action, which was instituted against them on a bond alleged to have been executed by George Ziegler and Jacob Ziegler, two of the plaintiffs in error, as administrators de bonis non of the goods and chattels, &c. of1 Daniel Sprenkle deceased; and by Ephraim Martin and David Ziegler, the other two plaintiffs in error, as sureties of the first two for their faithfully administering the goods, &c. of the said deceased, according to the terms of the condition of the bond.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Brubaker's Administrator v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
- Parkinson v. City of ParkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877