Chase's Executors v. Burkholder
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of replevin, brought by the plaintiff in error in the Court below, to recover certain property detained by Burk-holder, the defendant, as security.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of replevin, brought by the plaintiff in error in the Court below, to recover certain property detained by Burk-holder, the defendant, as security. Judgment was entered for defendant, subject to the opinion of the Court on a case stated as follows, viz.: “It is agreed that judgment be entered for defendant, and for a return of the goods irreplevisable, and that the damages be liquidated at $177.61 for the detention (the award in No. 415, April Term, 1848, in the District Court), and interest thereon from Sept. 26, 1848 (the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Bell, J.
A candid construction of the agreement of these parties submitting the point of their controversy for adjudication, leads, almost irresistibly, to the conclusion attained by the Court below, that the object was to ascertain the defendant’s right to recover his claim, under the facts stated, Avithout regard to the form of the action. After stating the proposed ground of defence, the agreement proceeds, “if the Court believe this is a defence sufficient in law to prevent a recovery of the bill for boarding, under the Acts of Assembly relative to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Biddis v. JamesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1814
- Badgley v. BealeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Scattergood v. Waterman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1839
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smilansky v. Mandel Bros.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931