Machin v. Prudential Trust Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 128, Oct. T., 1904, by defendant, from order of O. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Jutie T., 1904, No. 688, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Arthur Machín et al. v. Prudential Trust Company. Assumpsit on a contract of guaranty. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The material averments of the affidavit of defense are set forth in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 128, Oct. T., 1904, by defendant, from order of O. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Jutie T., 1904, No. 688, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Arthur Machín et al. v. Prudential Trust Company. Assumpsit on a contract of guaranty. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The material averments of the affidavit of defense are set forth in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
The substance of the statement of claim is that the plaintiffs agree to construct for the Monongahela Real Estate Corporation two buildings for which they were to be paid $477,000. The capital of the corporation was only $1,000 and the payments were to be provided for by an increase of capital and by loans to be secured, one of $200,000 on first mortgage and one of $40,000 on second mortgage. Of the second loan $30,000 was to be paid the plaintiffs on the completion of the building. The agreement between these parties was in writing but was not to become binding…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- County of Schuylkill v. CopleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- McCulloch v. McKeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851
- Atherholt v. HughesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
3Cited by2 opinions
- Noel v. KesslerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Harvey v. DimonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908