Schmitt v. Dietterle
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 121, April T., 1918, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lawrence Co., Dec. T., 1914, No. 61, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of V. J. Schmitt, Receiver of the Interstate Lumber Company, v. Andrew Dietterle and J. C. Liebendorfer, trading as Castle Lumber and Construction Company. Assumpsit by a receiver of a corporation for moneys alleged to be due the company.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 121, April T., 1918, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lawrence Co., Dec. T., 1914, No. 61, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of V. J. Schmitt, Receiver of the Interstate Lumber Company, v. Andrew Dietterle and J. C. Liebendorfer, trading as Castle Lumber and Construction Company. Assumpsit by a receiver of a corporation for moneys alleged to be due the company. The averments of the statement of claim and affidavit of defense are summarized in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order making absolute rule for…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
Plaintiff’s statement avers, inter alia, that in 1912 he was made receiver of the Interstate Lumber Company, a Pennsylvania corporation; that during the years 1909 and 1910, defendant purchased, at various times, lumber, etc., from his company to the value of $1,418.83, and that, further, during the said years defendant became indebted by various notes, protest fees, interest on notes and expenses on production and organization according to various contracts with said plaintiff company, in the sum of $526.56; that defendants were credited with the payment of $1,395.39,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Savage v. EvermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872
- Harmon v. BlackwellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- Hoover v. PurselSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917