Frick & Lindsay Co. v. Kent & Kervin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 246, Jan. T., 1919, by defendant, from order of C. P. McKean Co., June T., 1917, No. 143, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Frick & Lindsay Co. v. R. E. Kent & D. J. Kervin. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 246, Jan. T., 1919, by defendant, from order of C. P. McKean Co., June T., 1917, No. 143, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Frick & Lindsay Co. v. R. E. Kent & D. J. Kervin. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The court made the rule absolute in an opinion by Bouton, P. J., which was as follows: The plaintiff brought suit to recover for certain machinery, etc., sold defendants on a written contract, a copy of which is attached to plaintiff’s statement of claim. This machinery was to be delivered…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The judgment in this case is affirmed on the opinion of the learned court below making the rule for it absolute.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Gross v. Exeter Machine Works, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. LenowitzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Arnold v. Caine, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1943
- Badenhausen Corp. v. Lang Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America v. McGuirk, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1930