Morton v. Plowman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Certiorari to Jonathan Penrose, of Philadelphia county, esquire. This was an action brought on a promissory note, and the justice had given judgment for the plaintiff for 4I. 7s. 6d. and costs.
Read the full summary
Certiorari to Jonathan Penrose, of Philadelphia county, esquire. This was an action brought on a promissory note, and the justice had given judgment for the plaintiff for 4I. 7s. 6d. and costs. Exception was taken, that the note, though the defendant’s signing of it was contested, was not proved by the subscribing witnesses, who might have been procured, but the proof respecting it was by comparison of it with the hand writing of the defendant, on which the justice founded his judgment. It appeared, that the defendant after judgment, had entered *2521 a recognizance in nature of special bail,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
Unquestionably the proof before the magistrate was not the legal evidence which the law calls for, where the subscribing witnesses could have been had. Had this been a debt under forty shillings, where the party had no appeal, the court would most probably have set aside the proceedings, But here the party had a full and complete remedy, by an appeal, and we will not furnish him with an extraordinary remedy, where he has neglected to use an obvious one, clearly within his reach. The great delay also which he has affected, furnishes us with an additional argument why we should not…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Overseers of Washington v. Overseers of BeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
- Carey v. Branch No. 2, District No. 7, W. B. A., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County1873
- M'Veytown v. Union TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843