O'Rorke v. Geary

56 A. 541, 207 Pa. 240, 1903 Pa. LEXIS 487
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 9, 1903·No. Appeal, No. 90·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

On a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense the court below entered judgment for plaintiff (see opinion filed) for the larger part of his claim. That opinion sufficiently vindicates the judgment.

The assignments of error are overruled and the judgment affirmed for the reasons given in the opinion of the court below.

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

O'Rorke v. Geary, 56 A. 541, 207 Pa. 240, 1903 Pa. LEXIS 487 (Pa. 1903).

56 A. 541 (O'Rorke v. Geary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Rothman
204 B.R. 143 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1996)
Surovcik v. D & K OPTICAL, INC.
702 F. Supp. 1171 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1988)
RKO-Stanley Warner Theatres, Inc. v. Graziano
355 A.2d 830 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1976)
Gifford v. Jackson
156 S.E.2d 105 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Stanley J. How & Associates, Inc. v. Boss
222 F. Supp. 936 (S.D. Iowa, 1963)
In Re Collins Hosiery Mills, Inc.
19 F. Supp. 500 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1937)