Legal Opinion

Emery v. Gilkeson

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Chester County

Decided October 20, 1941Published

1Opinion of the Court

Harvey, J.,

Defendant, contending that the return shows no legal service, has moved to set aside the service of the writ of summons in assumpsit.

*358The return reads as follows: “Served the within summons in assumpsit July 7, 1941, upon the within named defendant Paul Gilkeson by handing a true and attested copy of the within writ, together with a copy of plaintiff’s statement of claim to Ralph Hamman, agent of the within named defendant, Paul Gilkeson, at his place of business, Corner Stores, Schuylkill Twp., Chester County, Penna., at 11:30 a.m. and made known the contents thereof, said deft.,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lehigh Valley Insurance v. FullerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
  2. Winrow v. RaymondSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846
  3. Rogers v. Metropolitan Life Ins.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API