Schofield v. Leach
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 147, Oct. T., 1900, by defendants, in suit of Charles S. Schofield, Receiver of the iEtna Mutual Live Stock Insurance Company, against Lucien Y. Leach, trading as A. S. Leach & Company, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1900, No. 949, in favor of plaintiff for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Opinion by Oblady, J. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Before the court in banc.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 147, Oct. T., 1900, by defendants, in suit of Charles S. Schofield, Receiver of the iEtna Mutual Live Stock Insurance Company, against Lucien Y. Leach, trading as A. S. Leach & Company, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1900, No. 949, in favor of plaintiff for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Opinion by Oblady, J. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Before the court in banc. It appears from the record that this was an action brought by the receiver of a mutual insurance company to recover certain assessments amounting to…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
This action is brought by a receiver of a mutual insurance company to recover certain assessments which had been levied by the receiver under authority of the court of common pleas of Dauphin county. The defendant filed an affidavit of defense which, on a hearing in the court below, was adjudged insufficient, and a rule for judgment was made absolute. Unfor*357tunately for the defendant every phase of his defense has been passed upon by the Supreme or Superior Court, and each contention has been resolved against him. The regularity of the appointment of the receiver was not…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Capital City Mutual Fire Insurance ex rel. Kramer v. BoggsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Stockley v. RiebenackSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Susquehanna Mutual Fire Ins. v. OberholtzerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Capital City Mutual Fire Ins. v. BoggsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Stockley v. HartleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Backenstoe v. KlineSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Snader v. BombergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Brown v. SpackmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Moore v. BestlineSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Moore v. ReifsnyderSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.