Speers v. Richards

17 A. 756, 127 Pa. 63, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1080
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 27, 1889·No. No. 115; No. 11·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This was an appeal from the refusal of the court below to [65] upen a judgment. The petition filed upon which the rule was granted, contained a prayer that the entry of said judgment be stricken off and tliat it be opened and the defendant let into a defence. The court did not act upon tbe motion to strike off the judgment; the motion to open it was refused. Had it acted upon both, the refusal to open is the only one that could be heard upon this appeal. There is no merit in either application. The judgment bad been of record for sixteen .years before any application was made either to strike off: or to open it, and no reason is assigned for tbe delay. Aside from this, the only defence which tbe defendant sets up, that of payment, can be beard upon tbe scire facias to revive, which is now pending.

The order is affirmed.

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

Speers v. Richards, 17 A. 756, 127 Pa. 63, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1080 (Pa. 1889).

17 A. 756 (Speers v. Richards) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pittsburgh Housing Authority v. Turner
30 Pa. D. & C.2d 105 (Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas, 1963)