Monroe v. Monroe
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne county: Of January Term 1880, No. 205. Feigned issue, wherein Perry Monroe, to use of J. S. Koons, was plaintiff and Henderson Monroe defendant, to try the validity of a judgment-note. The note was to stand as a declaration. The defendant pleaded payment with leave, &c.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne county: Of January Term 1880, No. 205. Feigned issue, wherein Perry Monroe, to use of J. S. Koons, was plaintiff and Henderson Monroe defendant, to try the validity of a judgment-note. The note was to stand as a declaration. The defendant pleaded payment with leave, &c. It appeared that, on March 2d 1863, Henderson Monroe signed a note for $501.75, payable to Perry Monroe or bearer, with confession of judgment and waiver of inquisition and exemption. Two days thereafter judgment was entered thereon in the name of Perry Monroe, to the use of J. S.…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Paxson
There are five assignments of error in this case. We will consider them in their order.
1. The record discloses no request to the court to give a binding *525instruction to the jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff. And had such request been made it would have been the duty of the court to decline it. The facts were for the jury.
2 and 3. These errors are not properly assigned. The points referred to are not set forth as required by the rules of court. We might well decline to discuss them for this reason. The record show's, however, that they were read to the jury and affirmed. That they were…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Pusic v. SalakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Trader v. NewcomerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Miller Bros. v. KeenanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928