Kyler v. Christman
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 5, Feb. T., 1903, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lycoming Co., Dec. T., 19,10 No. 365, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Leonard Kyler v. J. W. Christ-man. Assumpsit for price of lumber and for services in driving logs.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 5, Feb. T., 1903, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lycoming Co., Dec. T., 19,10 No. 365, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Leonard Kyler v. J. W. Christ-man. Assumpsit for price of lumber and for services in driving logs. The affidavit of defense was as follows : 1. The defendant admits that he entered into a contract with the plaintiff in the fall of 1899, which contract was in writing and is not declared upon in this case, nor is any copy of the same filed by the plaintiff as required by law. And further, defendant owes…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
One of the rules most inflexibly held, respecting affidavits of defense, is that every matter of defense presented must be set forth specifically, and with such detail as to show, clearly and definitely, its relation to the plaintiff’s claim. Nothing must be left to inference, and what is not stated must be regarded as not existing. Its averments must form a complete answer to the plaintiff’s demand.
In the present case, the affidavit alleges a written contract between the parties, not declared on, and of which the plaintiff *550has filed no copy. While nothing arising from…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ramsdell v. SeybertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Caven-Williamson Ammonia Co. v. Ice Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905