Bright ex rel. Knorr v. Diamond

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Bright ex rel. Knorr v. Diamond

42 A. 45, 189 Pa. 476, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 673

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJanuary 3, 1899

DocketAppeal, No. 211

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 42 A. 45 (Bright ex rel. Knorr v. Diamond) 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

Bright ex rel. Knorr v. Diamond, 42 A. 45, 189 Pa. 476, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 673 (Pa. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The facts set out in the defendant’s petition to have the judgment opened were clearly sufficient to justify the court in making the rule absolute. There was corroborative testimony given which supported the allegations contained in the petition. As a matter of course the mere order to open did not assume to make any disposition of the costs or attorney’s commission, and that subject is left entirely open for future determination.

Order affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

The facts set out in the defendant’s petition to have the judgment opened were clearly sufficient to justify the court in making the rule absolute. There was corroborative testimony given which supported the allegations contained in the petition. As a matter of course the mere order to open did not assume to make any disposition of the costs or attorney’s commission, and that subject is left entirely open for future determination.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A. 45, 189 Pa. 476, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bright-ex-rel-knorr-v-diamond-pa-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack