Legal Opinion

Architectural Tile Co. v. McSorley

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 29, 1933No. Appeal, 94PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Defendant appeals from judgment entered for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The action was assumpsit to recover the amount of three trade acceptances drawn by plaintiff to its own order upon defendant and accepted by Mm. The affidavit of defense admits all averments of the statement of claim and sets up as a defense an oral agreement, alleged to have been made at the time the instruments in question were executed, to the effect that payment would not be demanded until the buildings for which the materials were furnished had been “adequately financed by mortgage or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Speier v. MichelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. Second National Bank v. YeagerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  3. Heist v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
  4. Homewood People's Bank v. HeckertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. DIPPEL v. BrunozziSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Boyd EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. Richards v. Integrity Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Cohen v. CarolSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  5. Gill's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API