Dock v. Dock
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 197, Jan. T., 1896, by-defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1898, No. 122, sustaining demurrer to bill in equity. Bill in equity for discovery and general relief.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 197, Jan. T., 1896, by-defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1898, No. 122, sustaining demurrer to bill in equity. Bill in equity for discovery and general relief. June 17, 1895, plaintiff filed her bill -which was as follows: Susan V. Dock, of the city of Philadelphia, widow, brings this her bill against Margaret A. Dock, and thereupon your oratrix complains and says: 1. That on 3d day of June, A. D. 1893, the said Margaret A. Dock caused a summons in trespass to be issued out of this honorable court against the plaintiff in this bill, Susan V. Dock. Under a…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
The reasons assigned in support of the demurrer are wholly insufficient.
The remedy at law is neither convenient nor adequate. The bill is first for discovery in aid of a defense to the suit. Under the act of 1798 the appellant might have had a rule to produce at the trial such letters and alleged copies as appellant could specify with reasonable precision beforehand, but the bill avers that she had in fact written no such letters as appellee charged, and the contents of the alleged copies were therefore entirely unknown to her. The effect of deferring the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Birnbaum v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1977
- Peoples City Bank v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Yorkshire Worsted Mills v. National Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Goodman v. LaneCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
- Lesser v. HenrySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.