Legal Opinion

Smyth v. Fidel. Dep. Co. of Md.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 29, 1936No. Appeal, 321PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Cunningham, J.,

The action below was assumpsit against the principal and surety in a certain injunction bond. Plaintiff, an attorney at law, had been restrained by an injunction from transferring a certain stock certificate, then in his possession but belonging to a client and upon which he claimed a lien for professional services, and brought the present suit to recover damages allegedly sustained by reason of the injunction. The principal in the bond was not served and the action proceeded against the surety.

There is no dispute about the facts. At the trial, plaintiff alone offered…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. McKelvy's & Sterrett's AppealsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
  2. Devers v. Scranton CitySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  3. Balsbaugh v. FrazerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1852
  4. Dubois's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
  5. Sensenig v. ParrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Gardner v. Freystown Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  2. Turtle Creek Bank & Trust Co. v. MurdockSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  3. Parks v. " MR. FORD"District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
  4. Welded Tube Company of America v. Phoenix Steel Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  5. Juniata Accep. Corp., to Use v. HoffmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

14 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