Legal Opinion

Porter v. Arnold

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County

Decided March 22, 1948No. 784Published

1Opinion of the Court

Sweney, J.,

This ease comes before us upon defendants’ preliminary objections to plaintiff’s complaint in an action of assumpsit to recover treble damages, and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to the provisions of the Emergency Price Control Act of January 30, 1942, 56 Stat. at L. 23, as amended, and the Housing and Rent Act of June 30, 1947, 61 Stat. at L. 193.

Defendants’ first objection is that plaintiff “fails to aver in concise and summary form all of the material terms of the oral lease in accordance with Pa. R. C. P. 1019(a).” We think the complaint substantially complies…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Porter v. Warner Holding Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Testa v. KattSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Claflin v. HousemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  4. Fleming v. Mohawk Wrecking & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  5. Cox v. . Lykes BrothersNew York Court of Appeals · 1924

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API