Hessel v. Johnson
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
No. 184 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 534 March Term 1888, C. P. No. 4. On March 14, 1888, Henry Hessel brought replevin against M. T. Johnson, agent, and R. D. Thompson, bailiff, for the recovery of certain goods distrained for rent in arrear, due from Clinton S. Fritz. The writ was served and the property delivered to the plaintiff by the sheriff.
Read the full summary
No. 184 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 534 March Term 1888, C. P. No. 4. On March 14, 1888, Henry Hessel brought replevin against M. T. Johnson, agent, and R. D. Thompson, bailiff, for the recovery of certain goods distrained for rent in arrear, due from Clinton S. Fritz. The writ was served and the property delivered to the plaintiff by the sheriff. The defendant, Johnson, filed an avowry and cognizance to which the plaintiff filed several pleas, upon one of which issue was joined. After trial, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant, finding the rent in arrear to be…
1DissentJustice Mitchell
noted his dissent.
Subsequently, counsel for the appellee filed a motion for a re-argument, accompanied by a brief contending as follows:
1. The transaction between Johnson and Fritz, after the latter had become assignee of the Rossiter lease, whereby a new lease was to be substituted therefor from a future date, November 1,1887, at most was but an agreement for surrender, and not a surrender per se. It required to be followed by a surrender of possession, to make it effectual. In Huddlestone v. Johnston, 1 McC. & Y. 143, it was expressly decided that an agreement for surrender, not followed by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hessel v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889