Barrett v. Bemelmans

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Barrett v. Bemelmans

26 A. 307, 155 Pa. 204, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1223

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 10, 1893·No. Appeal, No. 205·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam,

An examination of the affidavit of defence fully vindicates the action of the court below. The trustee seems by the statement and affidavit to have been appointed by the joint act of six owners of the real estate from which the rent accrues. The plaintiff alleges a revocation on her part. It is impossible to anticipate the showing that may be made, or to determine in advance the character and legal effect of the alleged revocation; but as the affidavit denies its effect upon the lease, and the [208] powers of the trustee, and alleges payment in full to him of the rent now demanded, the ease should go to trial.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

Pee Curiam,

An examination of the affidavit of defence fully vindicates the action of the court below. The trustee seems by the statement and affidavit to have been appointed by the joint act of six owners of the real estate from which the rent accrues. The plaintiff alleges a revocation on her part. It is impossible to anticipate the showing that may be made, or to determine in advance the character and legal effect of the alleged revocation; but as the affidavit denies its effect upon the lease, and the [208] powers of the trustee, and alleges payment in full to him of the rent now demanded, the ease should go to trial.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

Barrett v. Bemelmans, 26 A. 307, 155 Pa. 204, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1223 (Pa. 1893).

Pincite

26 A. 307 (Barrett v. Bemelmans) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related