Ballingall v. Kite
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 179, Oct. T., 1909, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1903, No. 3,193, making absolute rule to dismiss proceedings before a magistrate in case of Peter Ballingall, to use of United States Audit Company, v. Edward J. Kite and Earl E. Kite. Appeal from judgment of a magistrate. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order making absolute rule to dismiss the proceedings.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Morrison, J.,
The legal plaintiff, in December, 1903, brought suit against defendants before a magistrate to recover the sum of $100 for services rendered them by him as an accountant. The magistrate entered judgment in favor of plaintiff for $100, with interest and costs. Defendants appealed to the common pleas and plaintiff filed a statement in the common pleas concluding as follows: “On the 24th day of June, 1901, he, plaintiff, received a payment of $100 on account leaving a balance due *430thereon of $100 which he claimed with interest from June 24th, 1901, and which sum he avers is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Stroh v. UhrichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Collins v. CollinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Murphy v. FloodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854
- Piper's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1852
- Peter v. SchlosserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Neel, Insurance Commissioner v. CannSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Goelz v. EcclestonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Simon v. IrwinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929