Legal Opinion

Porter v. Cresson

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 15, 1823PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland county. This was an action upon a single bill for the payment of money, given by the defendants below, John Porter, Hugh Bigham and Robert Hunter, to the plaintiffs below, Cresson, Wistar fy Co., and declared on as given to Cresson, Wistar fy Co., in whose names the suit was brought. The defendants pleaded non est /ac-tum and payment: the plaintiffs replied non solverunt, and issues were joined.

Read the full summary

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland county. This was an action upon a single bill for the payment of money, given by the defendants below, John Porter, Hugh Bigham and Robert Hunter, to the plaintiffs below, Cresson, Wistar fy Co., and declared on as given to Cresson, Wistar fy Co., in whose names the suit was brought. The defendants pleaded non est /ac-tum and payment: the plaintiffs replied non solverunt, and issues were joined. On the trial, the execution of the bill was proved by the plaintiffs, and also that the plaintiffs composed a company of four persons.' The…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court (Tilghman, C. J. being absent,) was delivered by

Duncan, J.

It is certainly true, that in all legal proceedings, the parties, plaintiffs and defendants, should be brought by name on the record, and it is irregular to bring an action for or against a company, without naming all the parties. Yet this is not error, for after a verdict, a court will presume A. B. & Co. to be the real name of the party. There is a case decided, which I am not just *258ábíe td ky. lily hands on, in Which the widow MotéP and seta Wai! Considered as the name and cognomen bf a party.

On the plea of…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. M'Kinney v. MehaffeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
  2. A. M. Gilman & Co. v. CosgroveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
  3. Ives v. MuhlenburgAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907
  4. Morse v. Chase & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
  5. Seitz & Co. v. Buffum & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API