Arundel Sand & Gravel Co. v. Irwin
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 212, Oct. T., 1918, by defendant, from order of Municipal Oourt, Philadelphia Co., April T., 1918, No. 516, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Arundel Sand & Gravel Company v. Alexander D. Irwin, Jr., and Archibald O. Leighton, Copartners, trading as Irwin & Leighton. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 212, Oct. T., 1918, by defendant, from order of Municipal Oourt, Philadelphia Co., April T., 1918, No. 516, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Arundel Sand & Gravel Company v. Alexander D. Irwin, Jr., and Archibald O. Leighton, Copartners, trading as Irwin & Leighton. Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Crane, J., filed the following opinion: The rule for want of a sufficient answer was made absolute by the court upon the authority of Elzea v. Brown, 59 Pa. Superior Ct. 403; Estes v. Kaufman, 44 Pa. Superior Ct. 114, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The opinion filed in the court below making absolute the rules for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, is a complete answer to the argument of the • appellant, and for the reasons therein given the judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Maine Electric Co. v. General Engineering WorksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Wilkey v. Fayette Fuel Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Fayette County1923