Berks County Trust Co. v. Lyte
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 190, Jan. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., Dec. T., 1912, No. 59, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Berks County Trust Company v. Mary McJ. Lyte, Administratrix of. E. O. Lyte, deceased. Assumpsit on promissory note. Before Hassler, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict for plaintiff for $2,233 1-3 and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 190, Jan. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., Dec. T., 1912, No. 59, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Berks County Trust Company v. Mary McJ. Lyte, Administratrix of. E. O. Lyte, deceased. Assumpsit on promissory note. Before Hassler, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict for plaintiff for $2,233 1-3 and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were in admitting the note in evidence and in refusing binding instructions for the defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mestrezat,
This is an action of assumpsit brought by the holder against one of two makers of a joint and several negotiable promissory note. ' The note was made payable to the order of the makers and by them endorsed and delivered to the holder, the Berks County Trust Company, the plaintiff in this action. The copy of the note sued on and set out in the statement is as follows: “$2,000.00. Reading, Pa., May 12, 1909. On demand after date we, or either of us, promise to pay to the order of ourselves at The Berks County Trust Company Two Thousand 00-100 Dollars without…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Miners Savings Bank v. NaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Shenango Limestone Co. v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Harris v. BlitzsteinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Colonial Fi. Co. v. Hoover Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933