Lackawanna Trust Co. v. Carlucci
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 39, Jan. T., 1918, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Nov. T.j 1916, No. 301, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Lackawanna Trust Co. v. Frank Carlucci. Assumpsit on a promissory note. Before Newcomb, J. The court made absolute the rule for judgment. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Brown,
This action was brought by the Lackawanna Trust Company against Frank Carlucci as the maker of a promissory note, dated October 7, 1913, and payable three months after date to the order of J. A. Cassese, for $3,000. The note was endorsed by the payee, and the trust company avers in its statement of claim that it is the holder thereof in due course. This is specifically denied in the affidavit of defense, and the defendant thus substantially details the circumstances under which he signed the note and the trust company became the holder of it: In September,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gandy v. WeckerlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Peale v. AddicksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Estate of TaskerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
3Cited by16 opinions
- Rhodes v. TerheydenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Bank of Hooversville v. SagersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- First National Bank v. BaerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Corn Exchange National Bank & Trust Co. v. BurkhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Friend, Conservator v. KuhnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.