Brown v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Venango county: Of October Term 1886, No. 61. This was a judgment confessed by J. PI. Osmer, Esq., attorney by virtue of a power of attorney in a license bond in favor of the Commonwealth against Nathan Brown, Peter Curry, S. Kreis and Michael Neidle for the sum of two thousand dollars, the penaltj of said bond with the damages assessed at the sum of two hundred dollars.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Venango county: Of October Term 1886, No. 61. This was a judgment confessed by J. PI. Osmer, Esq., attorney by virtue of a power of attorney in a license bond in favor of the Commonwealth against Nathan Brown, Peter Curry, S. Kreis and Michael Neidle for the sum of two thousand dollars, the penaltj of said bond with the damages assessed at the sum of two hundred dollars. On motion the court granted a rule to show cause why the judgment should not be stricken off for reasons apparent of record, and also to show cause why a rvritof fieri facias issued upon…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court Avas filed
2Per curiam
— In the case of Lewis v. Smith, 2 S. & R., 141, it was held by this court, that where a judgment is confessed, if the plaintiff’s demand be in the nature of a debt, Avhich may be ascertained by calculation, whether it arise on a note or other writing, or on an account, it is sufficient to enter judgment generally. The judgment is supposed to be the amount of damages laid in the narr, and execution issues ac*337cordingly; but it is proper that the plaintiff should indorse the actual amount of the debt on the execution, and if injustice Inis thereby been done the…
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of Albany v. CasselCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
- Dalila Avila v. Attorney General United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2023
- Stehle v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
- Succession of BougèreSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1878