Murphy v. Morris
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
IN this case, the rule to show cause prayed for in the petition of the plaintiff, was granted. The facts stated in the petition were verified by the affidavit of the plaintiff..
Read the full summary
IN this case, the rule to show cause prayed for in the petition of the plaintiff, was granted. The facts stated in the petition were verified by the affidavit of the plaintiff.. The petition set forth, “ that he hath brought suit in this court upon an agreement entered into by Richard Morris, the defendant in said suit, and George McClellan of the one part, and your petitioner of the other part—by virtue whereof, Richard Morris, the defendant, is indebted to him in the sum of $1800—or such part thereof as may remain unpaid. That the said agreement was reduced to writing and executed by your…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Stroud, J.
The plaintiff states in his petition that the instrument of writing, of which he seeks an inspection, was executed by him, and that without retaining a copy, he delivered it to the defendant, in whose possession he believes it now is. He avers also, that it is the foundation of the action which he has brought, and that an inspection of it is necessary in order to enable him to declare accurately. His petition is verified by his oath, and not *62having been denied by the defendant, the facts which it avers, are to be taken as true.
An application…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Holland v. HallahanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Frescole v. City of LancasterU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1895
- Sork v. C. Trevor Dunham, Inc.Pennylvania Municipal Court, Philadelphia County · 1930
- United States Gypsum Co. v. Birdsboro Steel Foundry & Machine Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1943