Robinson v. Bulkly
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This suit was brought by the defendent in error, before an Alderman, to recover twenty-six dollars and seventy-one cents, and interest, for work and labour. The Alderman gave j udgment for plaintiff for thirty-two dollars. The defendant appealed. The declaration contained two counts, one for work and labour, and one for goods sold and delivered, alleging the cause of action in each at fifty dollars.
Read the full summary
This suit was brought by the defendent in error, before an Alderman, to recover twenty-six dollars and seventy-one cents, and interest, for work and labour. The Alderman gave j udgment for plaintiff for thirty-two dollars. The defendant appealed. The declaration contained two counts, one for work and labour, and one for goods sold and delivered, alleging the cause of action in each at fifty dollars. The plaintiff took out a rule of reference; the case was arbitrated and an award for plaintiff for thirty-two dollars and seventy-six cents, which was filed 24th May, Í833. The writ of error was…
1Per curiam
According to.the principle of Frantz v. Kaser, 3 Serg. & Rawle, 395, and Ebersoll v. Krug, 3 Binney, 528, the writ issued improvidently. It would have been well enough, had it been delivered after the period for an appeal had elapsed; but it was delivered on the eighteenth day, and it therefore cannot be sustained.
Writ of error .quashed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Frantz v. KaserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817