Fidler v. Hershey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, of Adams county: Of May Term 1879, No. 79. Debt by Samuel Hershey against Peter Fidler. Hershey issued his summons in debt against Peter Fidler. After the return-day, the plaintiff moved to amend, by adding the names of George W. Householder and Albert Spangler as co-defendants, which amendment was allowed under exception by defendant, and an alias summons was issued against said parties.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, of Adams county: Of May Term 1879, No. 79. Debt by Samuel Hershey against Peter Fidler. Hershey issued his summons in debt against Peter Fidler. After the return-day, the plaintiff moved to amend, by adding the names of George W. Householder and Albert Spangler as co-defendants, which amendment was allowed under exception by defendant, and an alias summons was issued against said parties. This writ was returned “ served on George W. Householder,” and as to “Albert Spangler not found.” Householder did not appear or make any defence to the suit. The plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Tiiunkey
Whenever it shall appear that a mistake or omission has been made in the name or names of any party, the court is authorized, by Act of May 4th 1862, Pamph. L. 574, in any stage of the proceedings, to permit amendments. Statutes relating to amendments are liberally construed in furtherance of trial upon the merits. The evidence tended to show and the jury found that there was a lease signed by Householder, Spangler and Eidler. As between themselves, Householder was principal and Spangler and Eidler his sureties, and though Hershey had knowledge of that relation, they were jointly liable to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Erie Bank v. GibsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
3Cited by3 opinions
- Booth v. DorseySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- First National Bank v. DeloneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Rafferty v. PittsburgSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900