Reamer v. Bell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, No. 2, of Allegheny county: Of October and November Term 1875, No. 118. This was an action of assumpsit, brought December 5th 1874, by Thompson Bell against Josiah Reamer, Wesley Wilson and others, partners under the name of “The Mahoning Iron Company.” The writ was served on Reamer and Wilson, and returned “Nihil” as to the other defendants.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, No. 2, of Allegheny county: Of October and November Term 1875, No. 118. This was an action of assumpsit, brought December 5th 1874, by Thompson Bell against Josiah Reamer, Wesley Wilson and others, partners under the name of “The Mahoning Iron Company.” The writ was served on Reamer and Wilson, and returned “Nihil” as to the other defendants. The cause of action was the following-nóte:— “f>7833.33J. Youngstown, Ohio, December 1st 1871. “ Two years after date we promise to pay to the order of William Dilworth, Jr., of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, seventy-eight…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Paxson
We think the affidavit of defence filed in this case, while not as specific as it might have been, was nevertheless sufficient to prevent judgment. The copy of the note filed by the plaintiff below goes to sustain the denial of his title contained in the affidavit referred to. It is endorsed “ William Dilworth, Jr.; pay R. McCurdy, Cash.” This is a special endorsement, and upon its face conveys no title to the plaintiff below. The further allegation that the note in controversy was procured by false and fraudulent representations, and that the consideration thereof has failed, coupled with…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Camden National Bank v. Fries-Breslin Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906