Legal Opinion

Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. v. Harrisburg Trust Co.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided August 6, 1938No. 4159PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHNSON, District Judge.

This is a motion for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The action is assumpsit to recover five thousand dollars, five years annual premium on a bond given by the plaintiff to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to secure deposits of the Commonwealth in defendant trust company. The motion alleges in substance that the affidavit of defense is insufficient because it is vague, evasive, inadequate and sets forth conclusions of law.

Plaintiff alleges in the statement that defendant has never furnished any evidence to plaintiff of its discharge or release…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. National Surety Co. v. StalloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
  3. Farrell v. North Scranton Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  4. National Surety Company v. . StalloNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  5. Hart v. StevensDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1938

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. v. Harrisburg Trust Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Credit Bancorp, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2001
  3. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. v. Harrisburg Trust Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1944

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API