Urbanus v. Turowskl

Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas

Urbanus v. Turowskl

14 Pa. D. & C. 546, 1930 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 487

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County

DecidedJanuary 11, 1930

DocketNo. 657

StatusPublished

This text of 14 Pa. D. & C. 546 (Urbanus v. Turowskl) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Urbanus v. Turowskl, 14 Pa. D. & C. 546, 1930 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 487 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Jones, J.,

This is a suit in assumpsit to recover the value of certain merchandise of the kind and for the prices set forth in a copy of the book account attached to plaintiff’s statement, which discloses that the first item is a debit balance on merchandise of $419‘.73. Then follows an itemized account of articles delivered afterwards and the price charged, and a balance due for which suit is instituted.

This statement is wholly defective and insufficient. Defendant is entitled to be informed of the item of $419.73, balance on merchandise. This item is not sufficiently specific to inform the defendant and to call upon him for an affidavit of defense. Therefore, the rule is made absolute and plaintiff is directed to file a more specific statement as herein suggested.

From Frank P. Slattery, Wilkes-Barre, Pa.

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

Jones, J.,

This is a suit in assumpsit to recover the value of certain merchandise of the kind and for the prices set forth in a copy of the book account attached to plaintiff’s statement, which discloses that the first item is a debit balance on merchandise of $419‘.73. Then follows an itemized account of articles delivered afterwards and the price charged, and a balance due for which suit is instituted.

This statement is wholly defective and insufficient. Defendant is entitled to be informed of the item of $419.73, balance on merchandise. This item is not sufficiently specific to inform the defendant and to call upon him for an affidavit of defense. Therefore, the rule is made absolute and plaintiff is directed to file a more specific statement as herein suggested.

From Frank P. Slattery, Wilkes-Barre, Pa.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 Pa. D. & C. 546, 1930 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urbanus-v-turowskl-pactcomplluzern-1930.