Davis v. Shoemaker
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This was a writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of.Philadelphia, where judgment had'been entered for the defendant in error, upon the following declaration and' subsequent pleadings:— James Davis, late of the township of Moyamensing, in the county ■ afore'said, blacksmith, ■ was summoned to answer David Shoemaker, of a plea that he render unto him the sum -oftwo hundred and ten dollars, which he owes to add- unjustly detains from him.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of.Philadelphia, where judgment had'been entered for the defendant in error, upon the following declaration and' subsequent pleadings:— James Davis, late of the township of Moyamensing, in the county ■ afore'said, blacksmith, ■ was summoned to answer David Shoemaker, of a plea that he render unto him the sum -oftwo hundred and ten dollars, which he owes to add- unjustly detains from him. And whereupon the said David, hy Henry-Shoemaker, his attorney, says, that whereas the said David? heretofore, to wit, on the third day.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the -court was delivered by.Gibson, C. J.
The act of 1713, -is copied nearly word,for word from the 21 Jac. 1, c. 16; and, although the letter exténds to all actions of debt for rent, it has been determined that the statute is a ■ bar to the recovery of rent reserved only-on leases by parol; a lease by indenture being équal to a specialty. (Hutt. 109, pl. 2.) The same principle is admitted in Hodsden v. Harridge, (2 Saund. 66.) And this construction is, no doubt, in accordance with the actual intent of the legislature; for it would have been nugatory to protect the lessee from…
2Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. BurkhartCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
- Smith v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Crittenden v. WoodruffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1850
- Taylor v. PipesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1872
- United States v. BurkleyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010