Himes v. Herr
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 102, Nov. T., 1896, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Lancaster Co., Jan. T., 1896, No. 964, making absolute rule to strike off satisfaction of judgment. Rule to strike off satisfaction of judgment. Real debt $500. The following facts appear from the opinion of the Superior Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 102, Nov. T., 1896, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Lancaster Co., Jan. T., 1896, No. 964, making absolute rule to strike off satisfaction of judgment. Rule to strike off satisfaction of judgment. Real debt $500. The following facts appear from the opinion of the Superior Court. “ To No. 964 of January term, 1886, a judgment was entered in the common pleas of Lancaster county in favor of Sarah Himes against Aaron Herr for $500, which was revived by an amicable scire facias to No. 154 of January term, 1891, for the same amount, and judgment entered thereon February 2, 1891. “ On…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
(after reciting the facts as above) :
From the inception of the loan until April 1, 1892, the interest was annually paid by Herr to Kennedy. The court below, in the opinion filed, imposed the whole burden of inquiry upon the borrower. “ Kennedy did not tell him whose money it was and he did not know until he saw the bond. After he saw the bond he knew the money came from Mrs. Himes. He does not say he ever made inquiry where Mrs. Himes resided or whether he should pay the money to her. He never asked Kennedy or inquired whether he had authority to receive the money and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- American Life Insurance & Trust Co. v. ShultzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
3Cited by12 opinions
- Rothman v. FilletteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Williams v. CookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Manzitti v. AmslerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Mynick v. BickingsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Walter v. BaldwinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.