Harper v. Biles
8 A. 446, 115 Pa. 594, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 352
Opinion
[599] The opinion of the court was filed March 7th, 1887.
— The reasons stated in the opinion of the learned judge clearly justify the court in refusing to strike oft the judgment. Not only were the laches too great, under the undisputed facts, for the defendant below to successfully invoke the aid of the equitable power of the court, but the judgment had also been regularly and duly revived: Duff v. Wynkoop, 74 Pa. St., 305.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harper v. Biles, 8 A. 446, 115 Pa. 594, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 352 (Pa. 1887).
8 A. 446 (Harper v. Biles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Keiper v. Keiper
494 A.2d 454 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1985)
Osttowski v. Smith
461 A.2d 1301 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1983)
Eastman Kodak Co. v. Osenider
193 A. 284 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
United States Brewing Co. v. Epp
247 Ill. App. 315 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1928)
Mayer Furniture Co. v. Putt
3 Pa. D. & C. 542 (Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, 1923)
Rakowski v. Rosenthal
109 A. 612 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1920)
Osterhout v. Briggs
37 Pa. Super. 169 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Einstein's Sons & Leffler v. Davidson
35 Fla. 342 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1895)