Delahunty Dyeing Machine Co. v. Pennsylvania Knitting Mills
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 192, Oct. T., 1901, by defendant, from order of C. P. Berks Co., May T., 1901, No. 33, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Delahunty Dyeing Machine Company v. Pennsylvania Knitting Mills of Reading. Assumpsit for price of two dye machines. The material averments of the statement and affidavit of defense are quoted in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 192, Oct. T., 1901, by defendant, from order of C. P. Berks Co., May T., 1901, No. 33, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Delahunty Dyeing Machine Company v. Pennsylvania Knitting Mills of Reading. Assumpsit for price of two dye machines. The material averments of the statement and affidavit of defense are quoted in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
A judgment was entered against the defendant for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense on a claim in the language of the statement — for “two dye machines of the plaintiff to be had and used on trial by the defendant; it, the defendant, *503promised the plaintiff to try the same within sixty days and then to return the same to the plaintiff if found unsatisfactory after reasonable trial as aforesaid or to pay the plaintiff nine hundred dollars for the same.”
The affidavit of defense alleged that the defendant “ by its employees skilled in said business of dyeing and of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Singerly v. ThayerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Seeley v. WellesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Adams Radiator & Boiler Works, Ltd. v. SchnaderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Howard v. SmedleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Philadelphia & Reading Railroad v. River Front RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Woodoleum Flooring Co. v. KayserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Meacham v. GardnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Smith v. WeaverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- McNally v. JenkinsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908