Craig v. Brown
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Armstrong county. These cases came into court on appeals from a justice of the peace. The defendants were the appellants. Ho stamp was affixed to the justice’s certificate. In consequence of this, rules to strike off, or quash, were taken.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Armstrong county. These cases came into court on appeals from a justice of the peace. The defendants were the appellants. Ho stamp was affixed to the justice’s certificate. In consequence of this, rules to strike off, or quash, were taken. One day after these rules were taken in open court, the appellants went into the prothonotary’s office and non grossed the causes while the rules were still pending, under the following rule of court:— “ Unless a declaration be filed in twelve months from the first day of the term to which an action is brought, a non pros, shall…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Strong, J.
— These two writs of error present hut one question. What is said in regard to one is therefore equally applicable to the other.
The motion to quash the appeals was not made'until more than a year after they had been entered, and after three full terms had expired. It was too late, and there was no error in refusing to sustain it. In Shank v. Warfell, 14 S. & R. 205, it was said that a motion to dismiss an appeal, on account of a defective recognisance, is somewhat in the nature of a plea in abatement, and should be made in reasonable time,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Edelman v. MoserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Sork v. C. Trevor Dunham, Inc.Pennylvania Municipal Court, Philadelphia County · 1930