Barbe v. Davis
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
THE facts were these. On the 12th of June 1835, a capias ad respondendum was issued in this case, returnable on the first Monday of July following. Upon this the defendant was arrested, and gave bail to the sheriff. On the 30th of June, the plaintiff filed his declaration, being assumpsit on a promissory note, a copy of which was filed at the same time. July 25th, on motion, judgment was entered for the plaintiff, for want of an affidavit of defence.
Read the full summary
THE facts were these. On the 12th of June 1835, a capias ad respondendum was issued in this case, returnable on the first Monday of July following. Upon this the defendant was arrested, and gave bail to the sheriff. On the 30th of June, the plaintiff filed his declaration, being assumpsit on a promissory note, a copy of which was filed at the same time. July 25th, on motion, judgment was entered for the plaintiff, for want of an affidavit of defence. Damages having been assessed by the pro--thonotary, on the 27th of the same month a fieri facias was issued upon this judgment. Two days…
1Concurrence
Pettit, President,
concurred with Stroud, J. He said that the common law argument against, the right of a plaintiff to proceed in the cause before regular appearance by the defendant, was held, in Hertzog v. Ellis, 3 Binn. 215, to have been entirely discarded by tbe plain language of the act of 1810, relative to arbitrations. He deemed it useless to say what his individual opinion might be as to the soundness of that conclusion. The present provision, however, being a substitute for the law of 1810, and the language being equally strong, he felt himself bound by the views of the supreme court,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kerlin v. HeacockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1810