Knapp v. Duck Creek Valley Oil Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
These were several writs of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny county. All the cases were actions of assumpsit by the Duck Creek Yalley Oil Company to recover the amount of subscriptions alleged to have been made for its capital stock, and all involved the question whether the claims filed by the plaintiffs were such as would justify a judgment against the defendants for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence under the 8th rule of that court, which is: “ In…
Read the full summary
These were several writs of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny county. All the cases were actions of assumpsit by the Duck Creek Yalley Oil Company to recover the amount of subscriptions alleged to have been made for its capital stock, and all involved the question whether the claims filed by the plaintiffs were such as would justify a judgment against the defendants for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence under the 8th rule of that court, which is: “ In actions on recognisances, judgments and other records, mortgages, mechanics’ liens, policies of insurance, book accounts,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, by
Thompson, J.
The questions of law involved are the same in each of these cases, and hence we consider them all together. We think the plaintiff below was not entitled to judgment in either, without considering whether the affidavits of defence were sufficient or insufficient, because of a failure on part of the company to comply with the rule of court entitling it to judgment for want of an affidavit of defence. Rule 8 of the Common Pleas, liké the 2d section of the Act of the 28th March 1855, requires a copy of the “ instrument of writing,” which is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bank of the United States v. ThayerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841