Bair v. Jackson
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 127, Oct. T., 1914, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1913, No. 1,653, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Oliver H. Bair v. William Jackson. Assumpsit for cost of a funeral. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The plaintiff sues for merchandise furnished and services rendered upon a written contract alleged to contain defendant’s signature, in which contract directions are given in regard to the conducting of the funeral of defendant’s mother and a statement of its cost. The contract is in the shape of a memorandum and one item contains the words, “charge to (signed) William Jackson, relation, son.”
The defendant filed an affidavit of defense and a supplemental affidavit. A careful perusal of both leaves us in the dark as to what the exact nature of the defense is. At no place…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Superior National Bank v. StadelmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Moore v. Susquehanna Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Boal v. Citizens' Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Swartz v. Historical Publishing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
3Cited by2 opinions
- Berko v. Kemper Construction Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Weiskopf v. Cahan, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1925