Winters v. Mowrer
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 165, July T., 1893, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Go., April T., No. 6, on verdict for defendant. Assumpsit. Before Livingston, P. J. Plaintiff-’s statement was as follows : “ A. L. Winters is the- plaintiff in this suit, and Christian Mowrer, administrator of the estate of George Mowrer, deceased, is the defendant therein, all residing in Lancaster county, Pa.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 165, July T., 1893, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Go., April T., No. 6, on verdict for defendant. Assumpsit. Before Livingston, P. J. Plaintiff-’s statement was as follows : “ A. L. Winters is the- plaintiff in this suit, and Christian Mowrer, administrator of the estate of George Mowrer, deceased, is the defendant therein, all residing in Lancaster county, Pa. Said George Mowrer, deceased, in his lifetime, to wit, on Sept. 23, 1889, borrowed from and received from said plaintiff the sum of four hundred and eighty dollars ($480), which amount of money he promised…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitchell,
The learned court below treated the note as the • cause of action set out in the statement, aud we cannot say that it was in error in doing so. The procedure act of 1887 requires the statement to be accompanied by a copy of the note, etc., “ upon which the plaintiff’s claim is founded,” and the statement in the present case first avers the debt, and then follows it, in the *244same count, with a copy of the note, set out not according to its legal effect as in a common law declaration, but according to its exact form and tenor as required by the procedure act. In…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Laginsky v. McColloughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Funk v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Funk v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Winters v. MowrerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Reel v. MartinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900