Ayres v. Novinger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the Common Pleas of Dauphin county. These were three cases argued together. In the first, it appeared that Novinger commenced proceedings before two justices, against Ayres and Armstrong, setting forth that they were his tenants under a lease which had expired. Ayres appealed, but her affidavit was defective, and the appeal was dismissed by the Common Pleas. She then sued out this writ of error.
Read the full summary
In error from the Common Pleas of Dauphin county. These were three cases argued together. In the first, it appeared that Novinger commenced proceedings before two justices, against Ayres and Armstrong, setting forth that they were his tenants under a lease which had expired. Ayres appealed, but her affidavit was defective, and the appeal was dismissed by the Common Pleas. She then sued out this writ of error. After the appeal had been dismissed, Novinger commenced the proceedings before two other justices: one against Armstrong alone, for the same cause as in the former case against Armstrong…
1Opinion of the CourtRogers, J.
These cases are so intimately blended, depending, as they do, on the same title, that justice requires they should be considered together.
We perceive no error in quashing the appeal in the case of the complainant v. Mary Ayres and William Armstrong. The appeal was taken by Mary Ayres, who, so far as appears, was a tenant, on her oath declaring merely that she verily believes she is entitled to the premises, instead of alleging, as she is bound to do by the act of 21st March, 1772, that the title to the land is disputed, or claimed by some person or persons named, in virtue of a right or title…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Marsteller v. MarstellerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890