Galbraith v. Walker
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Erie county: Of October and November Term 1880, No. 79. Assumpsit by Thomas M. Walker against William A. Galbraith and Charles Brandes. This was a case stated, and was filed by agreement of the parties as if a judgment had been obtained before an alderman and an appeal taken therefrom.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Erie county: Of October and November Term 1880, No. 79. Assumpsit by Thomas M. Walker against William A. Galbraith and Charles Brandes. This was a case stated, and was filed by agreement of the parties as if a judgment had been obtained before an alderman and an appeal taken therefrom. The following facts were agreed upon for the opinion of the court: The claim of the plaintiff is as follows: In No. 169, May Term 1873, of said court, the defendants had issued a summons in partition. The plaintiff was at that time sheriff of said county, and served the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Green
In the case of Rogers v. Burns, 3 Casey, on p. 528, we said: “ But the court below allowed interest on the judgment for costs. By the common law of England this is not allowed: 14 Viner’s Abr. 457; Sweatland v. Squire, Id. 458 ; Butler v. Burk, 2 Salk. 623 ; 3 Jacob’s Law Dic., tit. Interest. In Pennsylvania the same rule prevails, and the statute allowing interest on judgments is held to apply to the debt alone and not to the costs : 2 Dall. 105, note; McCausland’s Adm’rs v. Bell, 9 S. & R. 390.”
In Baum v. Reed, 24 P. F. Smith, on p. 322, we said: “ It is certainly the settled general rule…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Todd v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1790
3Cited by2 opinions
- Werner v. Hillman Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Davis v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1934