Musser v. Brindle
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 32, March T., 1903, by Charles E. Moore, assignee for benefit of creditors of George Brindle, from order of C. P. Cumberland Co., May T\, 1902, Nos. 17 and 18, discharging rule to set aside execution in case of Joseph E. Musser v. George Brindle. Rule to set aside execution. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was the order of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 32, March T., 1903, by Charles E. Moore, assignee for benefit of creditors of George Brindle, from order of C. P. Cumberland Co., May T\, 1902, Nos. 17 and 18, discharging rule to set aside execution in case of Joseph E. Musser v. George Brindle. Rule to set aside execution. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was the order of the court. That the legislature has the power to enact a law which changes the method of enforcing contracts existing at the time such a law is passed cannot be doubted: Breitenbach v. Bush, 44 Pa. 313 ; Coxe v. Martin, 44 Pa.…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion ry
Beaver, J.,
Plaintiff entered judgment against the defendant, who is a farmer and has never been engaged in any other business, April 2, 1902, upon judgment bonds secured by a mortgage dated April 1, 1895, and issued execution thereon on the day of the entry. April 12, 1902, defendant made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors to Charles E. Moore, the appellant. April 22, Í 902, the assignee presented his petition to the court of common pleas, asking that the writs of fieri facias in the hands of the sheriff, issued upon the judgments above referred to, might “ be set…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth ex rel. United States v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1814
3Cited by2 opinions
- Charles v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Rittenhouse's Insolvent EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906