Seidel v. Welzel

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Seidel v. Welzel

94 Pa. Super. 345, 1928 Pa. Super. LEXIS 193

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedOctober 10, 1928

DocketAppeal 137

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 94 Pa. Super. 345 (Seidel v. Welzel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Seidel v. Welzel, 94 Pa. Super. 345, 1928 Pa. Super. LEXIS 193 (Pa. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

This appeal is from the refusal to open a judgment entered by confession. The petition to open, filed in 1924, avers that defendant had been indebted to plaintiffs’ testator and to G. C. Seidel & Company, Inc., and that he paid the indebtedness to both parties, including that for which the judgment note was given, by transferring to plaintiffs’ testator certain shares of the capital stock of the corporation. The answer denied petitioner’s averment. Depositions on the part of defendant were taken in April, 1924, but were "not filed until February, 1928. As defendant is incompetent to testify to matters occurring between him and Seidel in Seidel’s lifetime, it is perhaps not surprising to find the depositions bare of any suggestion that supports the averment of payment made in the petition to open. In the circumstances the court was bound to refuse the petition.

Order affirmed.

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

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

This appeal is from the refusal to open a judgment entered by confession. The petition to open, filed in 1924, avers that defendant had been indebted to plaintiffs’ testator and to G. C. Seidel & Company, Inc., and that he paid the indebtedness to both parties, including that for which the judgment note was given, by transferring to plaintiffs’ testator certain shares of the capital stock of the corporation. The answer denied petitioner’s averment. Depositions on the part of defendant were taken in April, 1924, but were "not filed until February, 1928. As defendant is incompetent to testify to matters occurring between him and Seidel in Seidel’s lifetime, it is perhaps not surprising to find the depositions bare of any suggestion that supports the averment of payment made in the petition to open. In the circumstances the court was bound to refuse the petition.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 Pa. Super. 345, 1928 Pa. Super. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seidel-v-welzel-pasuperct-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack