Pickering v. Breen
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 46, April T., 1902, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Dec. T., 1900,-No. 356, on verdict for defendant in case of M. H. Pickering v. F. J. Breen, The Knoxville Land Improvement Company and Matthew Best. Replevin for goods distrained. Before Coluer, J. At the trial it appeared that the goods distrained belonged to a stranger, and were distrained when standing on the sidewalk of the demised premises in process of removal to a wagon.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 46, April T., 1902, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Dec. T., 1900,-No. 356, on verdict for defendant in case of M. H. Pickering v. F. J. Breen, The Knoxville Land Improvement Company and Matthew Best. Replevin for goods distrained. Before Coluer, J. At the trial it appeared that the goods distrained belonged to a stranger, and were distrained when standing on the sidewalk of the demised premises in process of removal to a wagon. The court charged that if the goods were levied upon before they reached the wagon and while still on the sidewalk, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
William W. Porter, J.,
The court below has held that the household goods belonging to a stranger not in the house but temporarily standing on the sidewalk in course of removal to a wagon are liable to distraint for rent due by the lessee.
The lease was of “ the following described premises, .... a five-room house No. 420 Dewey street in Knoxville borough.” Doubtless such a description carried not merely the building called “ a house,” but also the lot on which it stood. It will, not be denied that a levy on the property of a stranger, in order to be good, must be made while the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Walsh v. Philadelphia BourseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Boyle v. Coleraine Colliery Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Moxham Investment Corp. v. Thomas-Kinzey Lumber Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931