Anderson's Appeal

1 A. 329, 1 Sadler 45, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 660
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 5, 1885
StatusPublished

This text of 1 A. 329 (Anderson's Appeal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anderson's Appeal, 1 A. 329, 1 Sadler 45, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 660 (Pa. 1885).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The rule in this case was to show cause why the judgment should not be opened. The only fact proved to justify the opening of the judgment was the illegal interest charged in the note. Beaty v. Bordwell, 91 Pa. 438. That interest has been deducted and the appellants fully discharged therefrom. If all’ the other alleged equities did exist they are not to be asserted by-opening the judgment. No motion was made to strike off the judgment. If it had been, the evidence is insufficient to justify such action. The other alleged claims are not the subject of’ set-off against the judgment.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed, at the costs of the appellants.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Beaty v. Bordwell
91 Pa. 438 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 A. 329, 1 Sadler 45, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andersons-appeal-pa-1885.