Schalcher v. Bergdoll
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 106, Oct. T., 1909, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1908, No. 4,524, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Harry Schalcher v. EmmaC. Bergdoll. Assumpsit to recover compensation of personal services. The facts appear by the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
The plaintiff brought an action of assumpsit, in his individual right, to recover of the defendant for personal services, as an attorney at law. The defendant filed an affidavit of defense admitting the validity of several items of the claim aggregating $512.60, but attempting to assert, by way of set-off, a claim for the sum of $1,000, and averring her right to a certificate for a balance of $487.40. The court below held that the affidavit of defense did not allege such a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant as would entitle the defendant to set off in this…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Jenkins v. Rush Brook Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Blair v. WoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Milliken & Co. v. GardnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Jackson v. ClymerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1862
- Bentz v. BentzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Mintz v. Tri-County Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Levy v. ConlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Dodson Coal Co. v. DelanoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Stiteler v. DitzenbergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co. v. StephensSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.