Freeman v. Sanner
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 66, April T., 1899, by defendant, from order of C. P. Fayette Co., March T., 1898, No. 105, refusing motion to open judgment. Opinion by Smith, J. Motion to open judgment. Before Mestrezat, P. J. Tbe facts sufficiently appear from tbe opinion of tbe court below, as follows: On March 2,1897, by virtue of a general warrant of attorney, judgment was entered by tbe prothonotary on tbe note in this case. Tbe note was entered on tbe day of its date.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 66, April T., 1899, by defendant, from order of C. P. Fayette Co., March T., 1898, No. 105, refusing motion to open judgment. Opinion by Smith, J. Motion to open judgment. Before Mestrezat, P. J. Tbe facts sufficiently appear from tbe opinion of tbe court below, as follows: On March 2,1897, by virtue of a general warrant of attorney, judgment was entered by tbe prothonotary on tbe note in this case. Tbe note was entered on tbe day of its date. It calls for thé payment to the order of plaintiff of $500 in one year after its date, and is signed by tbe defendant by bis mark. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
In presenting an appeal to this court from the decision of the common pleas refusing to open a judgment, the appellant must show wherein the legal discretion vested in that tribunal has been abused.
It is a mistake to assume that this court will interfere with the judgment merely because part of the testimony submitted, considered apart from all the evidence offered, would warrant a reversal. It must clearly appear that the conclusion of the court below, based on all the testimony in the case, was erroneous. The right to decide whether a judgment shall be opened rests, in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kistler v. ScheirerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899