Zeigler v. Eckert
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Cumberland county. This was a judgment for $1000, entered upon a bond and warrant of attorney to August Term, 1840. There were also six other judgments on similar bonds, to the same term. There was also another between the same parties, of the same term, for $2000. All these judgments were opened, and the defendant let into a defence upon the plea of payment with leave.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Cumberland county. This was a judgment for $1000, entered upon a bond and warrant of attorney to August Term, 1840. There were also six other judgments on similar bonds, to the same term. There was also another between the same parties, of the same term, for $2000. All these judgments were opened, and the defendant let into a defence upon the plea of payment with leave. This was the trial of the issue in the first case, and the parties agreed that all the other cases except the last should abide the event of this. The plaintiffs gave in evidence the seven bonds of…
1Opinion of the CourtGrlBSON, C. J.
I view this controversy, belonging as it does to equity, as if it stood on a bill for the legacy; and the question is, how would a chancellor treat it ? It is certain he would not admit parol evidence to control the will. Such is the principle of Tufnel v. Constable, 8 Simon, 69 ; and Doyle v. Blake, 2 Scho. & Lef. 240. Nor to raise, but only to rebut an equity; and such ivas the rule in Fordyce v. Willes, 3 Br. C. C. 377; Freemantle v. Banks, 5 Ves. 79; and Monck v. Lord Monck, 1 Ball & Beatty, 298. But it certainly may be used by an executor, provided for by a legacy, to rebut the equity of…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Symonds v. ShermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Cannon v. EwinCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1934
- Sharp v. WightmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Baily's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Elwart's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.