City Bank of York v. Rieker
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 98, Jan. T., 1918, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. York Co., Oct. T., 1917, No. 24, on verdict for defendant in case of City Bank of York, Pennsylvania, v. Amos E. Rieker. Assumpsit on a promissory note. Before Wanner, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict for defendant and judgment thereon. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned, among others, was in refusing plaintiff’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto'.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Simpson,
Plaintiff sued upon two promissory notes for $5,000 and $4,500 respectively, given by the defendant to it. As collateral thereto plaintiff held certain stocks, and in addition two mortgages aggregating $17,000 secured upon a property in tíre Borough and County of Queens, New York. The mortgages were about four years overdue when assigned, and the property covered thereby was subject to two other mortgages upon which $20,750 was due, exclusive of interest, and to sewer and tax assessments aggregating nearly as much more; all of which were liens prior to the two…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Harper v. LukensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Union Trust Co. v. LongSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- First National Bank of Irwin v. FosterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Rock Island Plow Co. v. Cut Bank Implement Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1935
- Faunce v. SchuellerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.