Wright v. Linhart
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 54, Oct. T., 1913, by defendant, from order of C. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1912, No. 71, discharging a rule to open a confessed judgment in case of R. B. Wright v. Annie M. Linhart. Rule to open judgment upon a single bill confessed by warrant of attorney. Before Shaper, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. The court discharged the rule. Defendant appealed. Error assigned, among others, was in discharging the rule.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This appeal is from an order discharging a rule to open a judgment entered by warrant of attorney on a note for $3,000. The issue raised by the petition on which the rule was granted and the answer thereto was whether the defendant had been fraudulently induced by the representation of the plaintiff made at a time when she was unable to read because of the loss of her glasses, to sign the note on which judgment was en*223tered, when she owed only $800. The decision depended entirely on the credibility of witnesses and the learned judge who heard the case found from a careful…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bank v. FulmorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Steinmeyer v. SiebertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Augustine v. WolfSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Wernet's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1879
3Cited by13 opinions
- Mielcuszny Et Ux. v. Rosol (Et Ux.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Warren Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. FoleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Bowman v. BerkeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Rambo Building & Loan Ass'n v. DragoneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Sprenger, for Use v. LittenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.