Myton v. Duff

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Myton v. Duff

3 Walker 412

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJanuary 15, 1884

DocketNo. 194

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Walker 412 (Myton v. Duff) 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

Myton v. Duff, 3 Walker 412 (Pa. 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas on the 9th of June, 1884, in the following opinion,

Per Curiam :

The rule which applies to an apparant alteration of commercial paper, does not apply with equal strictness to an instrument under seal. In view of the fact that this note was under seal, the case was properly submitted to the jury and on evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

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

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas on the 9th of June, 1884, in the following opinion,

Per Curiam :

The rule which applies to an apparant alteration of commercial paper, does not apply with equal strictness to an instrument under seal. In view of the fact that this note was under seal, the case was properly submitted to the jury and on evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Walker 412, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/myton-v-duff-pa-1884.