Schimmel v. Cohen
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 18, May T., 1922, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., June T., 1921, No. 372, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of Samuel Schimmel et al., trading as Schimmel Electric Supply Co. v. Max Cohen. Assumpsit on promissory notes. Motion for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Before Fox, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 18, May T., 1922, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., June T., 1921, No. 372, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of Samuel Schimmel et al., trading as Schimmel Electric Supply Co. v. Max Cohen. Assumpsit on promissory notes. Motion for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Before Fox, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant appealed. Error assigned- was judgment, quoting record.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Frazer,
Plaintiffs, doing business as a partnership under the name of Schimmel Electric Supply Company, brought suit against defendant as endorser on a series of eight promissory notes, payable to plaintiffs’ order and made by Beiter Bros. & Vinicoff, all of which were duly protested at maturity for nonpayment, and notice given. The statement of claim averred plaintiffs were bona fide holders for value and were induced to accept the notes by reason of defendant’s endorsement. The affidavit of defense set out that' Beiter Bros. & Vinicoff were indebted to plaintiffs for…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Delaware County Trust, Safe Deposit & Title Insurance v. HaserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Covanhovan v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
- Snayberger v. FahlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Smith v. KeenerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Smith v. WachobSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bank of Hooversville v. SagersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Citizens' Bk. of Wind Gap v. LipschitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Seip Et Ux. v. LaubachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Rorison v. DaveySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Roka v. E. P. Wilbur Trust Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northampton County1927