Stephens-Adamson Manufacturing Co. v. Armstrong

91 A. 924, 245 Pa. 552, 1914 Pa. LEXIS 916
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 22, 1914·No. Appeal, No. 265·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The statement of the question involved is “Did the plaintiff waive its right to move for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense by entering a rule on the defendant to plead, and plea filed in pursuance thereof?” This question has been decided adversely to the appellant in the recent case of Dreifus v. Logan Iron Co., 245 Pa. 196. It is the only question on which the appellant is entitled to be heard. Lincoln v. Wakefield, 237 Pa. 97; Felin v. Philadelphia, 241 Pa. 164, and cases there cited.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Stephens-Adamson Manufacturing Co. v. Armstrong, 91 A. 924, 245 Pa. 552, 1914 Pa. LEXIS 916 (Pa. 1914).

91 A. 924 (Stephens-Adamson Manufacturing Co. v. Armstrong) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Cauffiel
148 A. 311 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1929)
United Shoe Machinery Co. v. Winston
58 Pa. Super. 526 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1914)