Roenigk's Appeals
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeals from decrees of the Common Pleas, No. 1, of Allegheny County refusing to open judgments. On September 30, 1833, two judgments were confessed in the court below upon notes and warrants of attorney, under seal, which were alleged to have been executed by one D. Kelly and the appellant in favor of appellant’s brother, the plaintiff below.
Read the full summary
Appeals from decrees of the Common Pleas, No. 1, of Allegheny County refusing to open judgments. On September 30, 1833, two judgments were confessed in the court below upon notes and warrants of attorney, under seal, which were alleged to have been executed by one D. Kelly and the appellant in favor of appellant’s brother, the plaintiff below. The appellant promptly presented his petition, under oath, denying in the most positive terms that he had ever executed the notes and warrants of attorney, or that they had been executed by his authority, and also denying all indebtedness to the…
1Per curiam
That the opening of a judgment entered on a warrant of attorney is a matter of sound discretion is well recognized by nu*286merous adjudged cases. Whether the court below had exercised sound discretion must be determined by an examination of the whole evidence. That is not furnished us in the present case. So far as the evidence is presented it shows a clear preponderance against the averment of the appellant. The burden of proof rests upon him to establish a defense. We are unable to see any difference in principle, in regard to the exercise of a sound discretion, whether the averment be a…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Jacobosky v. ZborowjanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Arbuckles & Co. v. CloughleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916