West v. Irwin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of AEegheny county: No. 11, to October and November Term 1873. On July 9th 1869, in the District Court of Allegheny county, judgment was entered in favor of Joseph Irwin against Joseph West, for $1920, on a single bill, with warrant of attorney dated February 1st 1869. On the 8th of April 1871, a rule was granted to show cause why the judgment should not be opened and the defendant let into a defence.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of AEegheny county: No. 11, to October and November Term 1873. On July 9th 1869, in the District Court of Allegheny county, judgment was entered in favor of Joseph Irwin against Joseph West, for $1920, on a single bill, with warrant of attorney dated February 1st 1869. On the 8th of April 1871, a rule was granted to show cause why the judgment should not be opened and the defendant let into a defence. On the 3d of February 1872, the judgment was opened, and the defendant let into a defence — “ the plaintiff to file a declaration on the note, and the defendant to…
1Opinion of the Court
*259The opinion of the court was delivered, March 2d 1874, by'
Williams, J. —
The single question in this case is whether the record of the judgment was admissible as primd facie evidence of the defendant’s execution of the note, and of the plaintiff’s right to recover thereon. If payment with leave to give the special matter in evidence had been the only plea, as in Cannell v. Crawford County, 9 P. F. Smith 168, there- would have been no error in the admission of the record, for the plea would have confessed the cause of action on which the judgment was entered. But there was also the plea of non…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Poelcher v. ZinkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- McGowan v. KnittelCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1905
- McGowan v. KnittelCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1905