Hagy v. Hardin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 166, Jan. T., 1897, by-Joseph W. H. Malmedie, garnishee, from order of C. P. No. 8, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1896, No. 772J, entering judgment against garnishee on answers. Rule for judgment against garnishee for want of sufficient answers. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was in entering judgment against garnishee for want of sufficient answers.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Dean,
The plaintiff entered judgment against Hardin, defendant, for SI,487.53, then issued attachment execution against Malmedie and summoned him as garnishee. Interrogatories were duly served, and Malmodie answered, in substance, that he was builder of certain dwelling houses in the city of Philadelphia, and had contracted with Hardin, the defendant, to do the plastering for the price of 16,000, seventy per cent of which was to be paid as the work progressed, and the balance, thirty per cent, when the work was fully completed; that Hardin had not fulfilled his contract,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- McCallum v. MorrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
3Cited by7 opinions
- In the Matter of Norman E. Halprin, Bankrupt. Commercial Sales, Inc., Assignee of Norman E. Halprin, United States of Apperica, Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1960
- Ruehl v. Maxwell Steel Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Bartram Building & Loan Ass'n v. EgglestonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Bell v. Philadelphia Binding & Mailing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Stewart v. Stewart (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.