United Security Life Ins. v. Perugini Union Mutual Belief Ass'n

110 A. 927, 267 Pa. 152, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 826
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 12, 1920·No. Appeal, No. 196·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The contention of the defendant in the court below was that the bond on which judgment had been entered against it, and the accompanying mortgage, together with the agreement entered into between the parties, constituted a wagering contract. The judgment was opened because in the opinion of the court the legality of the contract depended upon an important question of fact, as to which depositions had been taken on both sides, those taken by the defendant being amply sufficient to justify the submission of the controversy to a jury. We have not been convinced that this was error, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

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

United Security Life Ins. v. Perugini Union Mutual Belief Ass'n, 110 A. 927, 267 Pa. 152, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 826 (Pa. 1920).

110 A. 927 (United Security Life Ins. v. Perugini Union Mutual Belief Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related