Legal Opinion

Smith v. Wertheimer

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 5, 1921No. Appeal, No. 340PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal, No. 340, Oct. !T., 1920, by defendants, from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, Dec. T., 1919, No. 159, in favor of plaintiff for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in the case of Daniel Clark Wharton Smith v. Joseph Wertheimer and Mabel Wertheimer. Trespass for injuries to an automobile. Before MacNeille, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Rule to strike off judgment. The court discharged the rule. Defendants appealed.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 340, Oct. !T., 1920, by defendants, from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, Dec. T., 1919, No. 159, in favor of plaintiff for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in the case of Daniel Clark Wharton Smith v. Joseph Wertheimer and Mabel Wertheimer. Trespass for injuries to an automobile. Before MacNeille, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Rule to strike off judgment. The court discharged the rule. Defendants appealed. Error assigned was the order of the court. — Judgment by default cannot be taken in an action of trespass and any rule of…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The plaintiff brought an action of trespass against the defendant in the municipal court. The cause of action arose from an automobile collision. The plaintiff entered judgment for want of an affidavit of defense fourteen days after service of his statement of claim. An application was made by the defendant to strike off the judgment which was refused. Prom that ruling the defendant appeals. Judgment was entered on the authority of section b of rule 8 of the court which is in the following form: “In actions ex delicto, and in all other actions where the amount of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Corry v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
  2. Marlin v. WatersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
  3. Commonwealth ex rel. Citizens National Bank v. CampSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Parry v. First National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Equipment Corp. of America v. Primos Vanadium Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Stern v. LancasterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  4. Egner v. McGinnisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  5. Joseph F. Schanne v. Bioren Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API