Gould v. Crawford
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Carbon county. Dec. 17, 18. — The case was argued by Maxwell for plaintiff, and Porter for defendant. The opinion contains a full statement of all the facts of the cause.
1Opinion of the CourtRogers, J.
— This was an action of debt for work and labour done. Plea, nil debet.
The plaintiff filed three different declarations, and one statement. The court granted a rule to show cause, why all, but one, should not be stricken off. The plaintiff then withdrew all but two, which purported to be filed the 14th of August, 1844. Whereupon, the defend*90ant’s counsel made the following application to the court. There appearing to be, in this case, two declarations, marked filed, in the handwriting of the plaintiff’s attorney, on the same day, viz., the 14th of August, 1844, the counsel ask the court to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Girard v. GettigSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1810
- Miller v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1812
3Cited by9 opinions
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. HashmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1982
- Spencer v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2007
- Passarelli v. MorelloSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Com. v. Hostetter, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Leslie v. Hornung, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.