Legal Opinion

Deibert to Use. v. Rhodes

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 5, 1927No. Appeal, 31PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Walling,

This appeal involves the construction of the Act of March 31, 1915, P. L. 39, entitled, “An act relative to judgments, and prescribing the duties of prothonotaries in connection therewith,” which reads as follows, viz.: “Section 1. Be it enacted, etc., That the prothonotary of each county is hereby directed not to enter any judgment unless the judgment creditor, or his duly authorized attorney or agent, produces to the prothonotary a certificate signed by the judgment creditor, or by his duly authorized attorney or agent, setting forth the precise residence…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Romberger v. RombergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. McQuiston's AdoptionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  3. Norwegian StreetSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
  4. Apollo Borough v. ClepperSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  5. Commonwealth v. ZillafrowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. National Transit Co. v. BoardmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  2. American Labor Party CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Fishkin v. Hi-Acres, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  4. Prichard v. Willistown Township School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  5. Givertz v. Maine Medical CenterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API