Legal Opinion

Romano, for Use v. Loeb

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 24, 1937No. Appeals, 71, 72, and 106PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew,

The action is assumpsit against principal and surety on a bond required when the principal, Loeb, sécured a preliminary injunction against the present plaintiff, Romano, the principal’s landlord, restraining him, an alderman and a constable from ousting the tenant for nonpayment of rent accruing over a period of three years and amounting to more than $7,000. The alder-manic proceeding had already gone to judgment and the reason alleged in the bill for the injunction was that delicate questions of law and fact were presented which left the alderman without…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  2. Boyd v. BoydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833
  3. Bluestone v. DeroySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  4. Herron ex rel. Murray v. StevensonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  5. Winston v. LadnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. NORTHAMPTON N. BK. OF EASTON v. PiscanioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  2. Land Title Bank & Trust Co. v. BaronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Humphreys v. CainCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Philadelphia Fire Fighters' Union, Local 22 v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. NORTHAMPTON N. BK. OF EASTON v. PiscanioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API