Commonwealth v. Schanbacher

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Schanbacher

66 Pa. Super. 346, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 264

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 16, 1917

DocketAppeal, No. 5

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 66 Pa. Super. 346 (Commonwealth v. Schanbacher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Schanbacher, 66 Pa. Super. 346, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 264 (Pa. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Qrlady, P. j.,

The question involved in this case is so fully considered by Whitehead, J., that it is not necessary to adduce further arguments to justify the conclusion he reached. The defendant did not deliver himself to the jail as he [351]*351had agreed to do, until more than three months after judgment had been entered against him on his appeal to the Superior Court, and until eighteen days after this present action was instituted. The court rightly held that this was not a reasonable time under the circumstances, as he was bound to keep in motion the proceedings which he instituted to effect his discharge. If he failed to do this, or to surrender himself to prison, the condition of his bond is forfeited.

The rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense was properly made absolute, and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion by

Qrlady, P. j.,

The question involved in this case is so fully considered by Whitehead, J., that it is not necessary to adduce further arguments to justify the conclusion he reached. The defendant did not deliver himself to the jail as he [351]*351had agreed to do, until more than three months after judgment had been entered against him on his appeal to the Superior Court, and until eighteen days after this present action was instituted. The court rightly held that this was not a reasonable time under the circumstances, as he was bound to keep in motion the proceedings which he instituted to effect his discharge. If he failed to do this, or to surrender himself to prison, the condition of his bond is forfeited.

The rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense was properly made absolute, and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 Pa. Super. 346, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-schanbacher-pasuperct-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack