National Deposit Bank v. Mawson
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 235, Oct. T., 1910, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March Term, 1910, No. 4,560, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of National Deposit Bank of Philadelphia v. Lionel J. Mawson. Assumpsit on promissory notes. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was order discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The plaintiff brought this action to- recover a balance due on thirteen notes held by it (as a stockholder’s agent *87for purposes of liquidation), amounting in the aggregate to $3,009.75. On eight of these notes, the defendant was the accommodation indorser, and on the remaining five he was the maker, and one William L. Rodelheim was the payee and indorser.
The defense is summarized as follows: “The first eight notes sued for in the plaintiff’s statement amount to $1182.63. Deponent is entitled to credits as specifically set forth and allowed in the plaintiff’s statement,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Chestnut Street Trust & Saving Fund Co. v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Leas v. HaferSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Bell v. ClarkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Creasy & Wells v. Emanuel Reformed ChurchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
3Cited by2 opinions
- Harmony Creamery Co. v. BickertonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Commonwealth v. Firemen's Fund Indemnity Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northampton County1934