Oxweld Acetylene Co. v. Hastings
71 Pa. Super. 178, 1919 Pa. Super. LEXIS 56
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided February 28, 1919·No. Appeal, No. 41·Published·Cited by 6 cases
Opinion
The judgment in this case is affirmed for the reasons given by the court below in its opinion making absolute the rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Oxweld Acetylene Co. v. Hastings, 71 Pa. Super. 178, 1919 Pa. Super. LEXIS 56 (Pa. Ct. App. 1919).
71 Pa. Super. 178 (Oxweld Acetylene Co. v. Hastings) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lloyd & Elliott, Inc. v. Lang
180 A. 71 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1935)
East Coast Fi. Corp. v. Linck
159 A. 468 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1931)
Metropolitan Refining Co. v. Beaver Valley Mill Supply Co.
14 Pa. D. & C. 454 (Beaver County Court of Common Pleas, 1930)
Union Car Advertising Co. v. Young
95 Pa. Super. 223 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1928)
Gross v. Exeter Machine Works, Inc.
121 A. 195 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)
Colt Co. v. Evans
74 Pa. Super. 73 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1920)