Duncan v. Kirkpatrick
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of-county, in an action of assumpsit, in which Moses Kirkpatrick and Frederick Kasper were plaintiffs below and defendants in error, and Matthew Duncan defendant below and plaintiff in error, and in which case a verdict and judgment were rendered in favour of the plaintiffs below for the sum of two thousand nine hundred and seventy-six dollars and eighty-nine cents.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of-county, in an action of assumpsit, in which Moses Kirkpatrick and Frederick Kasper were plaintiffs below and defendants in error, and Matthew Duncan defendant below and plaintiff in error, and in which case a verdict and judgment were rendered in favour of the plaintiffs below for the sum of two thousand nine hundred and seventy-six dollars and eighty-nine cents. The declaration was in assumpsit setting forth the particulars of the case, and issues were joined on non assumpsit, and the statute of limitations. The suit was brought by the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, J.
In this case, as frequently happens in others, we are presented with a long list of superfluous points; and, as regards all but one, I shall merely say that the errors assigned are not sustained. The main question is, whether -.ssumpsit will lie for money which has been ordered to be refunded, on the reversal of the judgment of an inferior court. It is said in elementary books, that assumpsit is the proper action where money has been received under a judgment which is reversed; but this, I apprehend, must be restrained to cases of reversal…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Nelson v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Case of Boal's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
- Kennedy v. HugheySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Nelson v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 2017