Bournonville v. Goodall
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the District Court of Philadelphia. March 9. The plaintiffs filed a mechanics’ lien, and issued a scire facias, on the trial of which they were nonsuited by the court. They then filed a second claim for the same demand, and the defendants pleaded to the scire facias, the former judgment and the pendency of the former claim. But the court decided these were no defence.
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
The defendants’ plea is founded on the supposed conclusiveness of the judgment of nonsuit ordered by the *134judge on the trial of the first scire facias, in pursuance of the 7th section of the act of March 11, 1836. In its legal effect, as a flat bar to further proceedings under the mechanics’ lien law, it is thought to be analogous to a judgment rendered upon a demurrer to the plaintiff’s evidence; and, indeed, in Smythe v. Craig, 3 W. & S. 18, it was said a prayer for a nonsuit, under the statute, is effectively a demurrer to evidence, except that the judge cannot give judgment for the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Cleary v. Quaker City Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Dellacasse v. Floyd Exrs.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Fine v. SoiferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Fitzpatrick v. RileySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Altsman v. KellySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.