Zeibert v. Grew
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia. The action in the court below was a scire facias brought by Henry Grew, assignee of Samuel Webb, against Henry Smith and James M. Cooper, with notice to terre-tenants, upon a mortgage dated the 18th of August, 1836, executed by Smith and Cooper to Webb, to secure payment of a bond of the same date, with condition for the payment of the sum of $4000 in one year, with interest.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia. The action in the court below was a scire facias brought by Henry Grew, assignee of Samuel Webb, against Henry Smith and James M. Cooper, with notice to terre-tenants, upon a mortgage dated the 18th of August, 1836, executed by Smith and Cooper to Webb, to secure payment of a bond of the same date, with condition for the payment of the sum of $4000 in one year, with interest. John S. Zeibert, the terre-tenant, appeared and filed the following affidavit of defence. “ John S. Zeibert, the terre-tenant, being the owner of the…
1Per curiam
It is not alleged that the mortgagors were drawn into the purchase and consequent execution of the mortgage, by the alleged assurance that the principal 'would not be called for; and this distinguishes the case from Miller v. Henderson, (10 Serg. & Rawle, 190,) and brings it within the authority of Hain v. Kalback, (14 Serg. & Rawle, 159.)- The promise not to sue seems to have been gratuitous, and intended to mean nothing—an assurance rather than an engagement. With the supposed usurious transaction between the plaintiff and a precedent terre-tenant, the present terretenant has nothing to do,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hain v. KalbachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826
3Cited by1 opinion
- Henry & Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868