Philip Haibach Contracting Co. v. Hornung

113 A. 365, 270 Pa. 350, 1921 Pa. LEXIS 389
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 18, 1921·No. Appeal, No. 415·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of its rule foi judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. We have frequently held and recently repeated that unless we can say the action of the court in refusing judgment on rules of this character is clearly erroneous and free from doubt, its order will not be disturbed: Brown et al. v. Unger et al., 269 Pa. 471. Testing the pleadings in this case by that rule we are not convinced the action of the court below should be disturbed.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Philip Haibach Contracting Co. v. Hornung, 113 A. 365, 270 Pa. 350, 1921 Pa. LEXIS 389 (Pa. 1921).

113 A. 365 (Philip Haibach Contracting Co. v. Hornung) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mancia v. Marquette National Fire Ins.
124 A. 333 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1924)