McGarrity v. McMahon

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

McGarrity v. McMahon

87 A. 781, 240 Pa. 553, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 714

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 5, 1913·No. Appeal, No. 399·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

While the court below gave no reason for refusing fo open the judgment against the appellant, it is safe to assume that her petition was dismissed because it appeared from the depositions that she had given her obligation to the appellee as an original undertaking on her part, for a valuable consideration passing directly to her, and not for an antecedent debt of her husband. It is for this reason that the appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

Per Curiam,

While the court below gave no reason for refusing fo open the judgment against the appellant, it is safe to assume that her petition was dismissed because it appeared from the depositions that she had given her obligation to the appellee as an original undertaking on her part, for a valuable consideration passing directly to her, and not for an antecedent debt of her husband. It is for this reason that the appeal is dismissed with costs.

McGarrity v. McMahon, 87 A. 781, 240 Pa. 553, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 714 (Pa. 1913).

Pincite

87 A. 781 (McGarrity v. McMahon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related