People's Mut. F. Ins. v. Groff
26 A. 63, 154 Pa. 200, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 868
Opinion
This appeal is from the judgment against defendant for want of á sufficient affidavit of defence to plaintiff’s amended statement. In his opinion, sent up with the record, the learned judge of the common pleas has clearly pointed out wherein the affidavit of defence is defective. There appears to be no error in making the rule absolute and entering judgment in favor of plaintiff company for the amount of its claim. For reasons given in the opinion referred to, the judgment should be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People's Mut. F. Ins. v. Groff, 26 A. 63, 154 Pa. 200, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 868 (Pa. 1893).
26 A. 63 (People's Mut. F. Ins. v. Groff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Schoenfeld v. Meckes
57 Pa. D. & C. 531 (Philadelphia County Municipal Court, 1946)
Taggart, Ins. Com. v. Graham
165 A. 68 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
State Mutual Rodded Fire Insurance v. Randall
205 N.W. 165 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1925)
Donaldson v. Fortna
76 Pa. Super. 403 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)
Tanner v. O. M. Weber Co.
59 Pa. Super. 14 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Fidelity Mutual Fire Insurance v. Vitale
10 Pa. Super. 157 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1899)