Keenan v. Quigg
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 25, Oct. T., 1897, by defendants, from order of C. B. No. 3, Pbila. Go., June T., 1894, No. 1234, discharging rule to strike judgment from record. Rule to strike off judgment. It appears from the record that judgment was entered in the above case for want of an affidavit of defense, and damages assessed for $264.56. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. The court discharged the rule to strike the judgment from the record. Defendants appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 25, Oct. T., 1897, by defendants, from order of C. B. No. 3, Pbila. Go., June T., 1894, No. 1234, discharging rule to strike judgment from record. Rule to strike off judgment. It appears from the record that judgment was entered in the above case for want of an affidavit of defense, and damages assessed for $264.56. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. The court discharged the rule to strike the judgment from the record. Defendants appealed. Error assigned was refusal to strike judgment from the record.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
The record in this case discloses an anomalous method of procedure. The summons was returned served on the first Monday of August, 1894. On December 5, 1894, a plea was filed to a statement and rule to plead served on the defendants, but which statement and rule seem not to have been filed of record until January 30, 1895. On February 1, 1895, an affidavit of service of a copy of statement on November 24,1894, was filed. On March 13, 1895, á judgment was entered for want of an affidavit of defense, notwithstanding the fact that the cause would seem to have been at issue…
2Cited by1 opinion
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. BosciaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974