Weixel v. Lennox
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 121, Oct. T., 1896, by plaintiffs, from order of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., March. T., 1896, No. 720, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit on a promissory note. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The affidavit averred as follows: First.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 121, Oct. T., 1896, by plaintiffs, from order of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., March. T., 1896, No. 720, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit on a promissory note. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The affidavit averred as follows: First. At the time of the giving of the note sued upon the consideration of which being the transfer and assignment of certain oil and gas leases in Washington county, the plaintiff, W. J. Weixel, holding himself out to be Weixel & Co., falsely and fraudulently represented to…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
We are all of opinion that the affidavits of defense are sufficient to prevent a summary judgment and carry the case to a jury. It therefore follows that there was no error in discharging the rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Appeal dismissed at appellants’ costs, but without prejudice, etc.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Long v. LongSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904