Miller v. Jackson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 94, Oct. T., 1906, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lancaster Co., Dec. T., 1905, No. 37, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of John B. Miller, Assignee for Benefit of Creditors, v. Joseph Jackson. Replevin for chattels.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 94, Oct. T., 1906, by defendant, from order of C. P. Lancaster Co., Dec. T., 1905, No. 37, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of John B. Miller, Assignee for Benefit of Creditors, v. Joseph Jackson. Replevin for chattels. The plaintiff filed the following statement of claim : John B. Miller, assignee of William P. Chubbs and wife, of Little Britain township, Lancaster Co., Pa., says that on November 22, 1905, William P. Chubbs, who owned and resided on a farm at Oak Hill, Little Britain township, this county, with his wife…
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Morrison, J.:
I agree with the majority opinion reversing the judgment as *40to the bay horse, but I would go further and reverse the judgment generally.
The plaintiff having declared for the property as assignee of William P. Chubbs and wife, for the benefit of creditors, defendant filed an affidavit of defense setting up ownership and right of possession, and actual possession of the property replevied, before the writ issued. But on motion and argument the court held the affidavit of defense insufficient, and directed judgment against the defendant, and our question is,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wright & Slingluff v. WigtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- Reinheimer v. HemingwaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
- Kent, Santee & Co.'s AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
- Smith v. Equitable Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Swope v. CrawfordSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.