Legal Opinion

Lowenstein v. McGowan

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County

Decided August 20, 1923No. 278Published

1Opinion of the Court

Cummins, J.,

Plaintiff’s action is in trespass. In the statement of claim filed it is alleged that defendant contrived and caused to be broken an engagement to marry shortly theretofore existing between plaintiff and defendant’s son. Fifteen days’ service of process and the return-day having gone by without any pleading having been filed by defendant, it is contended by plaintiff that, under section 18 of the Practice Act of 1915, defendant’s motion to strike off plaintiff’s statement and demurrer thereto were too late. We are convinced that plaintiff’s contention as to the proper construction…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Fuel City Mfg. Co. v. Waynesburg Products Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. Parry v. First National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Newbold v. PennockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  4. Muir v. Preferred Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  5. Montgomery Bros. v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API