Williams v. M'Fall
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. WRIT of error to the District Court for the' City and County of Philadelphia. Heed Williams and Adatn Seckel, on 17th September, 1811, issued a capias ad respondendum in case, in the Court below, against Daniel M'Fall and David Millington, returnable to December Term, 1811, to recover damages upon a joint contract. On the following day, Millington acknowledged service of the writ, and confessed a judgment to the plaintiff in, the sum of 2,631 dollars, 19 cents.
Read the full summary
In Error. WRIT of error to the District Court for the' City and County of Philadelphia. Heed Williams and Adatn Seckel, on 17th September, 1811, issued a capias ad respondendum in case, in the Court below, against Daniel M'Fall and David Millington, returnable to December Term, 1811, to recover damages upon a joint contract. On the following day, Millington acknowledged service of the writ, and confessed a judgment to the plaintiff in, the sum of 2,631 dollars, 19 cents. A ji. fa. was issued upon this judgment, returnable to December Term, 1811, which was levied upon the ship Rose. in Bloom,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
affirmed the judgment of the Court below, against David Millington, and also the judgment so far as it arrested the judgment against Daniel M'Fall, and reversed the same, so far as it was a judgment for the said Daniel M-Fall, and ordered the record to be remitted.
2Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. PriceSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Beltzhoover v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Nelson v. LloydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Shively v. United StatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Commonwealth v. ReesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.