Craig v. Lininger
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 88, April T., 1915, by defendant, from order of C. P. Mercer Co., April T., 1911, No. 97, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Frank P. Craig, et al., v. J. Mede Lininger. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 88, April T., 1915, by defendant, from order of C. P. Mercer Co., April T., 1911, No. 97, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Frank P. Craig, et al., v. J. Mede Lininger. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Williams, P. J., filed an opinion the material portions of which are as follows: The plaintiffs, Frank P. Craig, J. E. Callahan and John Hassel, were the duly elected and qualified county commissioners for the County of Mercer and performed their duties as such commissioners for and during the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The defendant, while district attorney, unlawfully received the money claimed in this action, and now seeks to retain it through a technicality that is entirely without legal merit. The opinion filed by the court below so fully disposed of the defense interposed, that it is needless to pursue the argument further.
The judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by3 opinions
- In Re: Appeal of Sykesville BoroughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- McGrath Attorney General v. Dravo CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
- National Surety Corp. v. Nulton, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Beaver County1945