Philadelphia v. Pemberton
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 103, Oct. T., 1903, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1902, No. 3885, M. L. D., discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of City of Philadelphia to use of Thomas Cunningham v. Clifford Pemberton, Jr., Owner, and Lancaster J. Jenkins, Reg. Owner. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 103, Oct. T., 1903, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1902, No. 3885, M. L. D., discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of City of Philadelphia to use of Thomas Cunningham v. Clifford Pemberton, Jr., Owner, and Lancaster J. Jenkins, Reg. Owner. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Portee, J.,
This was a scire facias sur municipal lien for paving. The court below discharged a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense and the plaintiff appeals. The affidavit of defense which the learned judge of the court below held to be sufficient did not allege that there had been a failure upon the part of the municipal authorities to comply with all the provisions of the statutes of the commonwealth and ordinances of the city in letting the contract under which the improvement in question was made; nor does it suggest that the' contract was not let in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Philadelphia v. PembertonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- City of Erie ex rel. Eichenlaub v. Piece of Land fronting on Eleventh StreetSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Williamsport v. HughesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902