Legal Opinion · Dissent

Alexander & Alexander, Inc. v. Central Penn National Bank

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 3, 1980No. 2227Published

1DissentSpaeth, Judge

I am not persuaded by the majority’s interpretation of the bond here, but instead read the conditions it states in the disjunctive, that is, before Berg could get back his collateral, either he had to satisfy the judgment against him within 90 days or the court had to lift the stay of execution.

In E. P. Wilbur Tr. Co. v. Eberts, 337 Pa. 161, 168, 10 A.2d 397, 400 (1940), the Supreme Court stated:

The covenants in a bond should be construed to mean what the parties intended so far as that intention can be ascertained by the words used .... If, however, the language is not free from doubt, then…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Manufacturers & Merchants Building & Loan Ass'n v. WilleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. Barratt v. GreenfieldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. E. P. Wilbur Trust Co. v. EbertsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  4. Krewson v. ErnySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API