Colwell v. Wehrly

24 A. 737, 150 Pa. 523, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1359
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJuly 13, 1892
DocketAppeal, No. 92
StatusPublished

This text of 24 A. 737 (Colwell v. Wehrly) 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
Colwell v. Wehrly, 24 A. 737, 150 Pa. 523, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1359 (Pa. 1892).

Opinion

Pee Curiam,

Tbe appellant is a member of the firm of J. A. Wolfersberger & Co., against which firm this suit was brought in the court below to May Term, 1877. In June, 1877, Wolfersberger, one of the defendants, filed an affidavit of defence to a part of the claim. Nothing further appears to have been done until October, 1891, when judgment was taken for the amount admitted to be due. An application was subsequently made by George Wehrly, one of the defendants, to open the judgment for the reasons stated in his petition. The judgment was not taken for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence, as alleged by appellant. On the contrary, it was taken, as the record shows, for only the amount admitted in defendant’s affidavit of defence to be due, and in open court, after notice to counsel of record, and he consenting thereto. Under these circumstances the judgment will have to stand.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 A. 737, 150 Pa. 523, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1359, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colwell-v-wehrly-pa-1892.