Thomas v. Miller
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 85, Oct. T., 1892, by defendant, Phillip Miller, executor of Richard Elliott, deceased, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Dec. T., 1890, No. 73, on verdict for plaintiff, Sarah A. Thomas. Issue to determine validity of judgment entered on bill single. At the trial, before Rayburn, P. J., defendant introduced evidence which tended to show that the signature to the note on which judgment was entered was a forgery.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 85, Oct. T., 1892, by defendant, Phillip Miller, executor of Richard Elliott, deceased, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Dec. T., 1890, No. 73, on verdict for plaintiff, Sarah A. Thomas. Issue to determine validity of judgment entered on bill single. At the trial, before Rayburn, P. J., defendant introduced evidence which tended to show that the signature to the note on which judgment was entered was a forgery. When Lee Miller, a witness for defendant, was on the stand, defendant made the following offer: Mr. King: We propose to show by this witness that he saw in the hand…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitchell,
The issue being upon the genuineness of the signature of a judgment note bearing date in February 1887 and entered up in September 1890, defendant’s offer to show that plaintiff had in her possession a few days before the entry of judgment on this one, other notes bearing the signature of the same maker, but in blank as to dates and amounts, should have been admitted. The possession of such blanks was a highly suspicious circumstance, calling for clear explanation, and none the less so, whether plaintiff then had this note or not. The lapse of time was not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Calhoun v. HaysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
3Cited by4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HouseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Thomas v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Moore v. Utah Idaho Cent. R. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1918
- Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee, Intervenors. Democratic National Committee v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Republican National Committee, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971