Scott v. Israel
2 Binn. 145, 1809 Pa. LEXIS 45
Opinion
We have no doubt in this case. The attorney having marked his name generally, and in no part of the record having declared that he appeared for one in particular, must be presumed to have appeared for both; and the plea entered in this short way, must be referred to the appearance, and be considered as a plea for both. As to the defendant’s being summoned, it is not material, he may appear without summons.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Scott v. Israel, 2 Binn. 145, 1809 Pa. LEXIS 45 (Pa. 1809).
2 Binn. 145 (Scott v. Israel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bank of Middletown v. Huntington
13 Abb. Pr. 402 (New York Supreme Court, 1862)
Blair v. Weaver
11 Serg. & Rawle 84 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1824)