Legal Opinion

Pennock v. Kennedy

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 20, 1893No. Appeal, No. 365PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal, No. 365, Jan. T., 1893, by defendant, Ebenezer F. Kennedy, from order of C. P. Chester Co., Aug. T., 1892, No. 12, discharging rule to open judgment. Buie to quash appeal and for penalties under act of 1874. From the record it appeared that, on July 14,1892, the court made absolute a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 365, Jan. T., 1893, by defendant, Ebenezer F. Kennedy, from order of C. P. Chester Co., Aug. T., 1892, No. 12, discharging rule to open judgment. Buie to quash appeal and for penalties under act of 1874. From the record it appeared that, on July 14,1892, the court made absolute a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence. On Feb. 20, 1893, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment [the preceding case]. On the same day the lower court granted a rule to show cause why the judgment should not be opened, on a petition of defendant which alleged that he had…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Williams,

The question on which this motion depends must be considered in the light of the provisions of the act of 1887 abolishing the distinctions between forms of action. The act declares that the defendant in all actions of assumpsit shall, if required so to do by the plaintiff, reply to the plaintiff’s statement of his cause of action by an affidavit stating his defence. This affidavit serves a double purpose. It discloses to the court facts which if made to appear to the satisfaction of a jury would make a good defence, and so carries the case to a jury for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Logan v. CaffreySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1858
  2. Philadelphia v. KatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  3. Alcott v. HugusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
  4. Corbet v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1855

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Stradley v. Bath Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  2. Raisig v. GrafSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  3. Fogel Refrigerator Co. v. OteriSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  4. Plains Township's AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  5. Burt v. North Philadelphia Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API