Cosmos Building & Loan Ass'n v. Courtenay

101 A. 315, 257 Pa. 153, 1917 Pa. LEXIS 697
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided March 12, 1917·No. Appeal, No. 192·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The judgment in this case was entered for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Shortly after it was entered a rule was granted, upon the application of defendant, to shmv cause why it should not be opened for reasons set forth in his petition for relief from it. The burden was upon him to support the averments of fact which he made in asking that the judgment be opened, and to negative the averments of fact contained in the answer to his petition. After a very careful review of what he showed in support of his averments, the learned court below concluded that they had not been supported by sufficient evidence, and the rule to show cause was discharged. We concur in this conclusion, and the appeal is dismissed at appellant’s costs.

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

Cosmos Building & Loan Ass'n v. Courtenay, 101 A. 315, 257 Pa. 153, 1917 Pa. LEXIS 697 (Pa. 1917).

101 A. 315 (Cosmos Building & Loan Ass'n v. Courtenay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tradesmens National Bank & Trust Co. v. Lewis
34 A.2d 818 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1943)