Straus v. Welsh
This text of 29 Pa. Super. 437 (Straus v. Welsh) 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.
Opinion
.Opinion by
This was a judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. The affidavits are not well drawn but they exhibit a substantial defense to $60.00 of plaintiff’s claim.
To distinguish this case, in principle, from Simpson v. Karr, 22 Pa. Superior Ct. 8, and cases there cited, requires a refinement of criticism that we are not disposed to exercise in an endeavor to sustain a judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. If the affidavit and supplemental. affidavit of defense state facts, and we must now assume that they do, the case should have gone to a jury as to all of the plaintiff’s claim, except $88.00 and interest thereon.
The assignment of error is sustained and the judgment reversed, without prejudice, and a procedendo awarded, with leave to plaintiffs to move for judgment for $88.00, with interest thereon and costs, if they so desire, and they may go to trial for the balance of their claim.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 Pa. Super. 437, 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/straus-v-welsh-pasuperct-1905.