Shoemaker v. Farrell
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 17, March T., 1916, by defendants, from order of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1914, No. 1122, discharging rule to open judgment in case of George Shoemaker to use of the Deposit and Sayings Bank of Kingston, v. John C. Farrell and William L. Farrell. Rule to open judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 17, March T., 1916, by defendants, from order of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1914, No. 1122, discharging rule to open judgment in case of George Shoemaker to use of the Deposit and Sayings Bank of Kingston, v. John C. Farrell and William L. Farrell. Rule to open judgment. From the record it appeared that on May 28, 1897, George Shoemaker sold to John 0. Farrell and William L. Farrell, a tract of ten acres of land in the City of Wilkes-Barre for twelve thousand dollars, receiving therefor one hundred dollars in .cash and a purchase-money bond and mortgage for $11,900, payable…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Kephart, J.,
An agreement to extend the time of payment of an overdue obligation must be based on a consideration: Hartmann v. Danner, 74 Pa. 36, “for the plain reason that, in a legal sense, it is neither a benefit to the creditor, who is entitled to the whole, nor an injury to the debtor, who ought to have done this and more without any promise from the creditor.” And as further stated in that case “it may be, that when there is a contract to pay interest for a specific period on a debt already due, so that the debtor, without the consent of the creditor, is thereby precluded from…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Melroy v. KemmererSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Ebert v. JohnsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Hartman v. DannerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
- Hendrick v. ThomasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Brush Hat Manufacturing Co. v. AbelesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.