Ross v. Eyre
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 257, Jan. T., 1917, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Philadelphia Co., Dec. T., 1912, No. 2137, entered for plaintiff after disagreement of jury in case of George Ewing Ross v. T. Larry Eyre. Assumpsit on promissory note. Before Martin, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme,- Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 257, Jan. T., 1917, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Philadelphia Co., Dec. T., 1912, No. 2137, entered for plaintiff after disagreement of jury in case of George Ewing Ross v. T. Larry Eyre. Assumpsit on promissory note. Before Martin, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme,- Court. On the trial the jury disagreed and subsequently the court below granted plaintiff’s motion for judgment under the provisions' of the Act of April 20, 1911, P. L. 70, and judgment was thereupon entered against the defendant for $3,271, representing the principal of the note…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cueiam,
On the trial of this suit upon a negotiable promissory note made by the appellant to the order of George L. Hoopes, and delivered by him, before maturity, to the First National Bank, of Logansport, Indiana, the jury disagreed, and subsequently the court below granted plaintiff’s motion for judgment, under the provisions of the Act of April 20, 1911, P. L. 70. Hoopes was dead at the time of the trial. In granting plaintiff’s motion for judgment the learned court below properly said: “While the note may have been given to Hoopes for his accommodation, there is no evidence to warrant…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Shrewsbury Savings Institution's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880