Grossman's Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, No. 1, of Philadelphia county: Of July Term 1882, No. 44. This was, in the court below, a rule to show cause why a judgment, entered under a power of attorney contained in a lease against a deceased lessee, should not be opened and the administratrix let into a defence, and a writ of habere facias possessionem set aside.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, No. 1, of Philadelphia county: Of July Term 1882, No. 44. This was, in the court below, a rule to show cause why a judgment, entered under a power of attorney contained in a lease against a deceased lessee, should not be opened and the administratrix let into a defence, and a writ of habere facias possessionem set aside. The following were the material facts: — On October 3rd 1881, Joseph Huber rented to Michael Grossman for the term of three years from October 1st 1881, at $40 per month, payable in advance, the premises, S. W. corner of Lawrence and…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Mercur
As the record does not show that any motion was made to strike off the judgment, we cannot consider the second specification of error. W e will consider the first assignment only.
The intestate died in possession under a lease for a term of three years which has not yet expired. After the death of the intestate and with full knowledge thereof, the appellee accepted pay,cent from the appellant, the widow and administratrix of the tenant, for a month’s rent in advance. Before the expiration of this month and when no rent was due him, on an unfounded rumor that the appellant had assigned the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Williams v. NotopolosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Lyman Felheim Co. v. WalkerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937