Scholtz v. Crescent Loan & Savings Ass'n
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 263, Oct. T., 1914, by defendant, from order of Municipal Court Philadelphia Co., Sept. T., 1914, No. 10, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of August Scholtz v. Crescent Loan and Savings Association. Assumpsit to recover the sum of $500.00 retained by the defendant out of a loan of $2,000.00 to plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 263, Oct. T., 1914, by defendant, from order of Municipal Court Philadelphia Co., Sept. T., 1914, No. 10, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of August Scholtz v. Crescent Loan and Savings Association. Assumpsit to recover the sum of $500.00 retained by the defendant out of a loan of $2,000.00 to plaintiff. From the record it appeared that the defendant had agreed to lend to the plaintiff the sum of $2,000.00 secured by a mortgage on certain properties in the City of Philadelphia. The application for the loan made by the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The Act of Assembly of July 12, 1913, P. L. 711, establishing the Municipal Court of Philadelphia provides in the second paragraph of Section 12, that the defendant must file an answer to the plaintiff’s claim with*392in ten days of the service of the statement upon him, in which answer he must either deny the facts averred in the plaintiff’s statement, or plead ignorance and demand proof as to such of which he has no knowledge. “After defendant has filed an answer the case shall he at issue, without any formal pleas, unless he sets up new matter in separate numbered…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Horner v. Horner, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Adams County1892
- Dreifus v. Logan Iron & Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hess v. Merion Title & Trust Co. of ArdmoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935