Patterson v. Pyle

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Patterson v. Pyle

17 A. 6, 1 Monag. 351, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1307

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedFebruary 25, 1889

DocketNo. 82

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 17 A. 6 (Patterson v. Pyle) 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

Patterson v. Pyle, 17 A. 6, 1 Monag. 351, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1307 (Pa. 1889).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The court below committed no-error in striking off this judgment. There was no authority in the lease to confess a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. Had the.confession of judgment followed the lease there would have been no room for objection upon this ground. The judgment was-properly stricken off, however, for the further reason that there was - nothing upon the record to show that the defendant had broken any of the covenants in the lease, and the law will not presume that he * has done so.

Judgment affirmed. T. E. P.

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

Per Curiam,

The court below committed no-error in striking off this judgment. There was no authority in the lease to confess a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. Had the.confession of judgment followed the lease there would have been no room for objection upon this ground. The judgment was-properly stricken off, however, for the further reason that there was - nothing upon the record to show that the defendant had broken any of the covenants in the lease, and the law will not presume that he * has done so.

Judgment affirmed. T. E. P.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A. 6, 1 Monag. 351, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-pyle-pa-1889.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack