Wailes Dove-Hermiston Corp. v. Walworth Co.

99 Pa. Super. 19, 1930 Pa. Super. LEXIS 257
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 17, 1930·No. Appeal 11·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from an order refusing judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. After reading the pleadings, and considering argument of counsel, we cannot say it is “clear and free from doubt” that the court below erred in refusing judgment; following the usual course pursued in such cases, we shall not disturb the orders appealed from; nor shall we discuss the applicable rules of law, till an opportunity is had fully to develop the facts at trial: Philadelphia v. Merchant & Evans Co., 289 Pa. 578; Hulton v. Union Ice & C. S. Co., 291 Pa. 447; Jaffe v. Lipsky Bros., 291 Pa. 470, and Real Estate-Land Title & Tr. Co., Executor, v. Fidelity Mutual L. I. Co., 2'95 Pa. 90.

The order appealed from is affirmed.

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

Wailes Dove-Hermiston Corp. v. Walworth Co., 99 Pa. Super. 19, 1930 Pa. Super. LEXIS 257 (Pa. Ct. App. 1930).

99 Pa. Super. 19 (Wailes Dove-Hermiston Corp. v. Walworth Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Richter v. Friedrich
169 A. 391 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1933)