Lusk v. Garrett
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR, to the District Court of Mercer county. John P. Garrett against Loring Lusk. This was an action founded upon a note for the payment of $434.91. On the same day the writ issued, the plaintiff entered a rule to have arbitrators chosen.
Read the full summary
ERROR, to the District Court of Mercer county. John P. Garrett against Loring Lusk. This was an action founded upon a note for the payment of $434.91. On the same day the writ issued, the plaintiff entered a rule to have arbitrators chosen. They were afterwards chosen, and made an award for the amount of the plaintiff’s claim, from which the defendant appealed and made the necessary affidavit required by law, and entered into recognizance, on the 23d August 1843. On the 11th September 1843, the plaintiff’s attorney signed a judgment in the prothonotary’s office against the defendant for want…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Huston, J.
In this case we are of opinion the judgment *90signed in the prothonotary’s office is not justified by the true construction of the several Acts of Assembly. The Act organizing a District Court, on which the plaintiff relies, is, as to the part material here, copied from the Act of 1835 creating the District Court in Philadelphia, in which the Arbitration Act was repealed in the Philadelphia district; and the special affidavit of defence required by that Act was intended to produce a judgment speedily, where there was no defence, without calling…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Downes v. HODINSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Duncan v. Bell, Johnston, Jack & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
- Russ Soda Fountain Co. v. Victor Pastry Shoppe, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Thompson v. DonaldsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Cooper v. Restenbalt, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lebanon County1855