Commonwealth v. Amantea
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 54, April T., 1914, by defendant, from order of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1913, Docket “A” making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Commonwealth to use of Maurice Joy v. Saverio Amantea. Assumpsit on an appeal bond. The material averments of the affidavit of defense and statement of claim are set forth in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 54, April T., 1914, by defendant, from order of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1913, Docket “A” making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Commonwealth to use of Maurice Joy v. Saverio Amantea. Assumpsit on an appeal bond. The material averments of the affidavit of defense and statement of claim are set forth in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
This is an action upon a bond given upon an appeal to this court in the case of Maurice Joy v. Frank Amantea, the bond being signed by said defendant with Saverio Amantea as surety, the condition of the bond-being that the appellant should prosecute his appeal with effect and pay all costs and damages awarded by *564the appellate court which are legally chargeable against him. The judgment was in that case affirmed and the liability of the defendant and his surety upon the bond became fixed.. The plaintiff having filed a statement, to which a copy of the bond was attached,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Andrews v. Blue Ridge Packing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Kaufman & Co. v. Cooper Iron Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Moore v. Susquehanna Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- King v. Security Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Chain v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891