Numan v. Kapp
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. THE plaintiff in error, gave his bond for the payment - , Yr . , r , of 400/. to Kapp, with a warrant of attorney, under which judgment was confessed for 800l. the penalty.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. THE plaintiff in error, gave his bond for the payment - , Yr . , r , of 400/. to Kapp, with a warrant of attorney, under which judgment was confessed for 800l. the penalty. The judgment was revived by an amicable sare jactas, and the lands of the obligor sold to Peter Gloninger, one of his creditors. lhe money levied was brought into court, and, cording to the record, the Common Pleas of Lancaster county, upon the application and affidavit of Gloninger and Moore, the creditors of Numan, were “ let in to a defence, as to the , r* t . 77 i • i i i r “ quantum oj this debt, to be tried…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
This case has been perplexed by wandering from the record. It will be attended with no difficulty if we consider the issue joined, and recollect that the charge of the court below is to be applied to that issue. Kapp, the plaintiff below, had entered judgment against Human the defendant, on his judgment bond for 800l. conditioned for payment of 400l. This judgment was afterwards revived by an amicable sci. fa., an execution issued, and the land of Human levied on and sold to Peter Gloninger, a creditor of Human’s. After these proceedings, a rale was granted far bringing the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth, Department of Transportation v. J. W. Bishop & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Stafford v. WalkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1824