Hoffman v. Whelan

28 A. 498, 160 Pa. 94, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 771
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided February 26, 1894·No. Appeal, No. 122·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

■Pee Curiam,

There was no error in refusing to enter judgment against •the defendant for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence.

In his statement of claim, plaintiff alleges that the assessments, which he seeks to collect, were levied for the purpose ■of paying the death losses of certain specified horses. In substance, the affidavit of defence denies the existence of any such indebtedness, and avers that at the time said assessments were made there was no such indebtedness by the company, nor is there now, and that the very claims for which said assessments were made have been paid. Assuming, as we must for the purposes of this case, that these averments are true, they con■stitute a substantial traverse of the plaintiff’s claim as presented ■in his statement.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Hoffman v. Whelan, 28 A. 498, 160 Pa. 94, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 771 (Pa. 1894).

28 A. 498 (Hoffman v. Whelan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sheppard v. Hidalgo County
90 S.W.2d 811 (Texas Supreme Court, 1936)
Capital City Mutual Fire Insurance ex rel. Kramer v. Boggs
33 A. 349 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1895)
City of New Orleans v. New Orleans Water-works Co.
36 La. Ann. 432 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1884)
City of New Orleans v. Louisiana Savings Bank & Safe Deposit Co.
31 La. 826 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1879)
Louisiana Cotton Manufacturing Co. v. City of New Orleans
31 La. 440 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1879)