Johnson v. Kerr ex rel. Kerr

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Johnson v. Kerr ex rel. Kerr

1 Serg. & Rawle 25

DecidedSeptember 9, 1814

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Serg. & Rawle 25 (Johnson v. Kerr ex rel. Kerr) 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.

Bluebook

Johnson v. Kerr ex rel. Kerr, 1 Serg. & Rawle 25 (Pa. 1814).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The release of Gilmore was not evidence, not having been pleaded. In that the Court below were right. But they were wrong in rejecting the declarations of William Kerr, because the lease was made by him and the action brought in his name. Neither does it appear that the lease was made by the authority, or with the knowledge or consent, of James Kerr the father of William, for whose use this sui£ on the lease is brought.

Judgment reversed, and Venire facias de novo awarded.'

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

By the Court.

The release of Gilmore was not evidence, not having been pleaded. In that the Court below were right. But they were wrong in rejecting the declarations of William Kerr, because the lease was made by him and the action brought in his name. Neither does it appear that the lease was made by the authority, or with the knowledge or consent, of James Kerr the father of William, for whose use this sui£ on the lease is brought.

Judgment reversed, and Venire facias de novo awarded.'

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Serg. & Rawle 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-kerr-ex-rel-kerr-pa-1814.