Strodick v. Pennington
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 20, Oct. T., 1908, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1907, No. 4,229, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Pauline Strodick et al. v. Elijah S. Pennington. Assumpsit for rent in arrears. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 20, Oct. T., 1908, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1907, No. 4,229, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Pauline Strodick et al. v. Elijah S. Pennington. Assumpsit for rent in arrears. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The affidavit of defense was as follows: Defendant is advised and believes, that plaintiffs ought not to maintain the present action for the reasons, that on October 31, 1907, these plaintiffs instituted-proceedings against defendant under the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Morrison, J.,
In taking his appeal and printing his paper-book the appellant has reversed the parties, making himself plaintiff, and the plaintiffs, defendants. For this- error we might quash the appeal, but have concluded to state the case correctly and consider it on its merits.
This was an action of assumpsit to recover rent alleged to be due and unpaid under a written contract. The plaintiff’s *477declaration stated a good cause of action and the defendant was properly required to file an affidavit of defense. The defense set up is that the plaintiff, on October 31, 1907, instituted…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hickey v. ConleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Ballou v. MehringSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Hazen v. CulbertsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840