Swartz ex rel. Stuart v. D. S. Morgan & Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeals, Nos. 81 and 82, July T., 1893, from order of C. P. Cumberland Co., Sept. T., 1890, No. 99, opening judgment. Rule to open judgment. Before Sadler, P. J. The petition for the rule by D. S. Morgan & Co. averred : “ That one Jacob Swartz has recovered a judgment in the said court of common pleas to No. 99, Sept.
Read the full summary
Appeals, Nos. 81 and 82, July T., 1893, from order of C. P. Cumberland Co., Sept. T., 1890, No. 99, opening judgment. Rule to open judgment. Before Sadler, P. J. The petition for the rule by D. S. Morgan & Co. averred : “ That one Jacob Swartz has recovered a judgment in the said court of common pleas to No. 99, Sept. Term, 1890, against D. S. Morgan & Co. and John T. Stuart and Walter Stuart for the sum of $300. That the summons in assumpsit issued on the 24tli day of June, 1890, and was served personally upon John T. Stuart, and service was accepted for all the defendants named in the writ…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
The petition of the defendants to have the judgment struck off as to them, avers that they had no knowledge of the feuit, and the appearance of Swartz for them ivas unauthorized; that they had a good defence, based on the fact that they did not execute the bond on which judgment was obtained. The testimony of defendants’ secretary, taken on the rule, shows that these are meant to be technical averments, and are only true in the letter.
An attorney employed to bring suit, has authority to take all the steps necessary in the regular course of litigation. Thus it…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Clark v. RandallWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Wilson v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848
- Reinholdt v. AlbertiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1808
- Schoregge v. GordonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
3Cited by10 opinions
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Conrad's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Starling v. West Erie Avenue Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Zidek v. Forbes National BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Grocery & Food Warehousemen Local Union No. 635 v. Kroger Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.