Roth v. Pechin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 243, Jan. T., 1917, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Montgomery Co., March T., 1916, No. 59, opening judgment entered for want of affidavit of defense in case of Carl Herman Roth, Trading as H. Roth & Company, v. John W. Pechin. Rule to open judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 243, Jan. T., 1917, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Montgomery Co., March T., 1916, No. 59, opening judgment entered for want of affidavit of defense in case of Carl Herman Roth, Trading as H. Roth & Company, v. John W. Pechin. Rule to open judgment. The facts appear in the following opinion by Swartz, P. J.: The plaintiff alleges that he sold and delivered to the defendant leather goods termed “bends,” on February 11, 1913, and on February 21st of the same year. The bill amounts to $1,410.82. The affidavit, in support of the attachment, under the Act of 1869, avers, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The learned court below committed no error in opening the judgment taken by the appellant against the ap*457pellee by default. If the former is entitled to judgment against the latter, he is protected by the lien of his attachment, which is preserved by the order of the court.
Appeal dismissed at the cost of appellant.
2Cited by10 opinions
- Fuel City Mfg. Co. v. Waynesburg Products Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Baraonfski v. MaloneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Commonwealth Trust Company of Pittsburgh's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America v. CovingtonNew York Supreme Court · 1939
- Hillegass v. Rhinesmith, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County1950
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.