Legal Opinion

Hastings v. Neely

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Venango County

Decided January 24, 1938No. 106Published

1Opinion of the Court

Rimer, P. J.,

specially presiding,

This is an action of replevin brought by the tenant against his landlord to repossess the tenant’s goods distrained upon for unpaid rent.

*444Under these proceedings the ownership of the goods subject to distraint is naturally assumed to be in the plaintiff and such ownership is set up in plaintiff’s declaration and admitted in the affidavit of defense.

Briefly speaking, plaintiff’s motion for judgment is upon the grounds that the affidavit of defense is insufficient, in that it does not sufficiently set up the facts relative to the tenancy of plaintiff under the.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McCrary v. McCullySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Hollander Brothers Drug Co v. American Surety Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
  3. Bandel v. EricksonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API