Leo v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 144, Oct. T., 1-898, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1898, No. 438, refusing judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit to recover the sum of $500, with interest, from April 23, 1897, alleged to be due the plaintiff as a result of the membership of plaintiff’s husband in the Voluntary Relief Department of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 144, Oct. T., 1-898, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1898, No. 438, refusing judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit to recover the sum of $500, with interest, from April 23, 1897, alleged to be due the plaintiff as a result of the membership of plaintiff’s husband in the Voluntary Relief Department of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. The court below discharged the rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
John H. Leo, on November 4, 1892, was an employee of the defendant company and a contributor to its Voluntary Relief Department. By an agreement between them it was stipulated that the defendant should apply from his wages the sum of $1.50 cents per month to the relief department, and that he should be entitled, in the event of sickness or accident, to benefits, and in the event of death resulting, that his wife, the plaintiff in this action, should be entitled to the sum of $500, subject to the conditions contained in the regulations adopted by the relief department.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hutton v. McLaughlinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Barker v. FairchildSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Landis v. West. Penna. R. Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1890