Bonstein v. Schweyer
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 54, Jan. T., 1905, by defendants, from order of C. P. Northampton Co., Dec. T., 1904, No. 26, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Jerome J. Bonstein, executor of Susanna Wagner v. Frank C. H. Schweyer, Albert S. Rabenold and W. II. Deshler. Assumpsit for balance of purchase money. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 54, Jan. T., 1905, by defendants, from order of C. P. Northampton Co., Dec. T., 1904, No. 26, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Jerome J. Bonstein, executor of Susanna Wagner v. Frank C. H. Schweyer, Albert S. Rabenold and W. II. Deshler. Assumpsit for balance of purchase money. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Schuyler, P. J., stated the facts to be as .follows: One John Wagner being seized of a certain farm died intestate, leaving to survive him a widow, Susanna, and three daughters to wit:…
1Opinion of the Court
.Opinion bt
Mr. Justice Brown,
There is no denial in the affidavit of defense of any material fact averred in the plaintiff’s statement. Sometime prior to April 4, 1877, John Wagner, late of the township of Lower Nazareth, county of Northampton, this state, died intestate, leaving to survive him a widow, Susanna Wagner, and three children: Susanna Wagner, Jr., Eva Matilda, married to Bar-net. Laubach, and Rebecca Elizabeth, married to John J. Young. He was the owner of a tract of land situated in the said township, containing a little over 100 acres. On April 4, 1877, by a deed of release the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fenton v. FentonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
3Cited by4 opinions
- Federal Deposit Ins. v. SteinmanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1943
- Bankwest, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Farmers Home AdministrationDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1989
- Dahlstrom v. UnknownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
- BankWest, Inc. v. US BY & THROUGH FHADistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1989