Montgomery v. Cunningham
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Eeeoe to the Court of Common Pleas of Indiana county: Of October and November Term 1883, No. 112. Assumpsit, brought February 3rd 1880, by John Montgomery against William Cunningham, to recover a sum of money alleged to have been paid by plaintiff as surety for defendant on a note which matured in 1851, and also a sum alleged to have been loaned by plaintiff to defendant, in 1854. Pleas, non assumpsit, non assumpsit infra sex annos, payment, payment with leave, &c.
Read the full summary
Eeeoe to the Court of Common Pleas of Indiana county: Of October and November Term 1883, No. 112. Assumpsit, brought February 3rd 1880, by John Montgomery against William Cunningham, to recover a sum of money alleged to have been paid by plaintiff as surety for defendant on a note which matured in 1851, and also a sum alleged to have been loaned by plaintiff to defendant, in 1854. Pleas, non assumpsit, non assumpsit infra sex annos, payment, payment with leave, &c. On the trial, before Blaip. P. J.,'the plaintiff testified in his own behalf, in chief, as to the payment by him of the note on…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was filed October 29th 1883.
2Per curiam
The refusal of a motion to strike out evidence received without objection, is not the snbjeet of a bill of exceptions: Ashton v. Sproule, 11 Casey 492; Oswald v. Kennedy, 12 Wright 9; Yeager v. Weaver, 14 P. F. Smith 425. Moreover the parol evidence referred to in the first specification of error, was followed by the certificate of discharge being given in evidence.
The plaintiff has no just cause of complaint-with the charge of the court as to the evidence of the kind of admission necessary to take the case out of the operation of the…
3Cited by4 opinions
- Forster v. Rogers Bros.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Keener v. Zartman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1891
- Lowrey v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Painter's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886