Pfaff v. Thomas
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 168, Not. T., 1896, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., March T., 1896, No. 984, making absolute rule to open judgment and let defendant into a defense. Rule to open judgment. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was making absolute rule to open judgment and let defendant in to make defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
This is an appeal by the plaintiff from an order making absolute a rule to open a judgment entered on a single bill with warrant of attorney, upon the allegation of partial want of consideration, and of duress in its execution. In view of the testimony of the defendant and that of his father-in-law, together with the plaintiff’s admission that at the time the instrument was executed he told the defendant that if the money demanded was not paid he would have him arrested, we are not prepared to say that the court below erred in the exercise of its discretion: Stockwell v.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bank v. FulmorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Kelber v. Pittsb. N. Plow Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1892
- Fisher v. KingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Stockwell v. WebsterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Citizens' Building & Loan Ass'n v. Hoagland & GassSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bauer v. HillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- State Camp of Penna. of Patriotic Sons of America v. KelleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Carp v. Ætna Accident & Liability Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Noll v. Corporation of Royal Exchange AssuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Fischer v. HaleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.