Shamburg v. Noble

80 Pa. 158, 1875 Pa. LEXIS 235
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 26, 1875·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Judgment was entered in the Supreme Court,

Per Curiam.

The court below had a perfect right, even after a writ of error brought, to allow the sheriff to amend his return of service: Berryhill v. Wells, 5 Binn. 60; Spackman v. Byers, 6 S. & R. 385; Paul v. Harden, 9 S. & R. 23; Wampler v. Shissler, 1 W. & S. 370. The record in this case had not been removed and was still with the court below. The amended return is in strict conformity with the Act of Assembly. No doubt, upon the defendant’s affidavit that he had not received the writ and was ignorant of the suit, and showing that he had a good defence, the court would have opened the judgment and let him into his defence; As the record stands amended there is no error.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Shamburg v. Noble, 80 Pa. 158, 1875 Pa. LEXIS 235 (Pa. 1875).

80 Pa. 158 (Shamburg v. Noble) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rogers v. Metropolitan Life Ins.
99 Pa. Super. 505 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1930)
Gauley Coal Land Ass'n v. Spies
55 S.E. 903 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1906)
Waynesburg Borough's North Ward
29 Pa. Super. 525 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1905)
Green v. Prince Metallic Paint Co.
25 Pa. Super. 418 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1904)