Frederic v. Margwarth
This text of 49 A. 881 (Frederic v. Margwarth) 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.
Opinion
Opinion by
The learned court below entered judgment for the plaintiff for want of sufficient affidavit of defense. The only question with which we are, therefore, concerned is as to whether or not the allegations of fact in the affidavit of defense are sufficient to send the case to a jury.
In the second paragraph, the defendant alleges a conspiracy between the umpire and the plaintiff, by which the umpire “ would sign and render any award which the plaintiff should bring to him to sign, whether the same be just or unjust; and that, according to said understanding, the award was made out by plaintiff, and delivered to said umpire, who signed it.”
It is further alleged that the plaintiff visited the umpire in the absence of the defendants, and influenced and controlled him in the making, of the award.
If these averments were proven, the award ought not to stand. While it is true that facts constituting fraud should be as fully set forth as the circumstances of the case will admit, yet we are of opinion that the allegations here are sufficient to carry the case to the jury.
The judgment is reversed and a procedendo awarded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
49 A. 881, 200 Pa. 156, 1901 Pa. LEXIS 454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frederic-v-margwarth-pa-1901.