Gorgerat v. M'Carty
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This action was brought on three bills of exchange, against the defendant as acceptor. Pleas non assumpsit and payment, and a discharge by the bankrupt laws of France. Replication, non solvit, no discharge and issues.
Read the full summary
This action was brought on three bills of exchange, against the defendant as acceptor. Pleas non assumpsit and payment, and a discharge by the bankrupt laws of France. Replication, non solvit, no discharge and issues. On the 14th April 1790, by agreement filed, judgment was confessed by the defendant to the plaintiffs, with a stay of execution until twelve days next before the first day of next term; agreed also, that the defendant be at liberty to have a trial under the judgment, whether anything, and how much may be due, by the general jury. On the 13th July 1790, the cause was tried…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court:
We all know that it is usual at the bar to enter judgments in order to bind lands, or for the purpose of proceeding to charge the special bail, and under these, judgments to try or refer the suits. In many instances, after such judgments entered for the plaintiffs, verdicts, reports of referees and judgments for the defendants have succeeded. The special agreement to enter judgment, admits nothing; but the defendant expressly reserves to himself a liberty to try by the general jury, whether any thing or how much is due to the plaintiffs. Notwithstanding therefore this first…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McDowell v. PerrineSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1883