Evans v. Lyon
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 230, Oct. T., 1906, by plaintiff, from order of C. P., No. 3, Phila. Co., March T., 1906, No. 4,249, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Allen R. Evans v. Gustav Lyon and Jonas Lichten, Copartners, trading as Lyon, Licbten & Company. Assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on a contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 230, Oct. T., 1906, by plaintiff, from order of C. P., No. 3, Phila. Co., March T., 1906, No. 4,249, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Allen R. Evans v. Gustav Lyon and Jonas Lichten, Copartners, trading as Lyon, Licbten & Company. Assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on a contract. From the record it appeared that the balance claimed was alleged to be due for goods of the plaintiff sold by the defendants on commissions, as agents. The defendants alleged in their affidavit of defense that the plaintiff had wrongfully…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Morrison, J.,
The learned court below discharged the rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, and the plaintiff *256excepted and. appealed to this court. A careful examination of the record convinces us that it would have been much wiser for the plaintiff to have accepted the decision of the court and proceeded to put his case at issue and try it on its merits.
The learned counsel for plaintiff only argues that the declaration and affidavit of defense left a sum apparently dne the plaintiff of $665.13. The first affidavit of defense was defective as to the items of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ludington v. NorthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Port Kennedy Slag Works v. William Krause & SonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Carnahan Stamping & Enameling Co. v. FoleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Penn Shovel Co. v. PhelpsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904