Fowler & Williams, Inc. v. International Lithographing

434 A.2d 792, 290 Pa. Super. 359, 1981 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3350
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 4, 1981·No. No. 1168·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal must be quashed. The action was instituted by appellee as a holder in due course of a note made by appellant in favor of Scranton Lithographing, Inc., for appellant’s failure to honor its note when presented for payment. Appellant counterclaimed, alleging fraud, and joined Scranton Lithographing as an additional defendant. The case was tried before the lower court without a jury. The court found against appellant on all three claims. Appellant filed exceptions, which the lower court dismissed. Appellant has appealed from the order dismissing its exceptions. An order dismissing exceptions following a trial without a jury is like an order refusing a new trial. It is interlocutory and unappealable. Penstan Supply, Inc. v. Hay, 283 Pa.Super. 558, 424 A.2d 950 (1981).

Quashed.

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

Fowler & Williams, Inc. v. International Lithographing, 434 A.2d 792, 290 Pa. Super. 359, 1981 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3350 (Pa. Ct. App. 1981).

434 A.2d 792 (Fowler & Williams, Inc. v. International Lithographing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Chaney
13 Pa. D. & C.4th 165 (Juniata County Court of Common Pleas, 1991)