Hawk v. Maxler
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 39, Oct. T., 1911, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 1, on verdict for plaintiff in case of A. A. Hawk v. Frank Maxler, Executor of the Last Will and Testament of C. W. Hawk. Assumpsit on a promissory note under seal. Reed, P. J., specially presiding, charged as follows: This is an action brought by Mrs. A. A. Hawk against the estate of C. W. Hawk to recover on a note made and executed by .C.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 39, Oct. T., 1911, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 1, on verdict for plaintiff in case of A. A. Hawk v. Frank Maxler, Executor of the Last Will and Testament of C. W. Hawk. Assumpsit on a promissory note under seal. Reed, P. J., specially presiding, charged as follows: This is an action brought by Mrs. A. A. Hawk against the estate of C. W. Hawk to recover on a note made and executed by .C. W. Hawk on May 9, 1905, to her order, payable three years after date, calling for the sum of $2,000, with interest at five per cent. On the back of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Moschzisker,
The plaintiff sued the defendant estate to recover on a promissory note payable to her order for two thousand dollars, dated May 9th, 1905, and executed by the decedent, C. W. Hawk. The trial occurred June 7, 1910. The note was offered in evidence and the signature of the maker proved. The defense then called the plaintiff for cross-examination. She testified that the maker was her son and that he gave her the note about two years before the date of the trial; that it was a gift to her; that there was nothing said between her and the donor as to when the note…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Guadiere v. SimeoneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942