Gorman v. Hibernian Building & Loan Ass'n

25 A. 827, 154 Pa. 133, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 855
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 16, 1893·No. Appeal, No. 346·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The judgment in this case was regularly entered, and we find no error in the refusal of the court below, either to strike it off or open it. It appears that the statement of plaintiff’s claim had been filed with the prsecipe, and served upon the defendant a few hours before the writ had been served upon it by the sheriff. . The fact that the plaintiff’s office boy served the statement before the service of the summons, is not material. There was nothing in it which necessarily misled the defendant. The statement was upon the record of the court, and an examination of it would have disclosed that fact.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Gorman v. Hibernian Building & Loan Ass'n, 25 A. 827, 154 Pa. 133, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 855 (Pa. 1893).

25 A. 827 (Gorman v. Hibernian Building & Loan Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dillman v. Markle
30 Pa. D. & C. 117 (Adams County Court of Common Pleas, 1937)
Smith v. Bergdoll
15 Pa. D. & C. 365 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1931)
Glazer v. Sanet
94 Pa. Super. 480 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1928)
Murta v. Reilly
118 A. 563 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1922)
Loeb v. Allen
32 Pa. Super. 137 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1906)