Williamsport National Bank v. Kreamer

79 A. 713, 230 Pa. 515, 1911 Pa. LEXIS 643
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided February 27, 1911·No. Appeal, No. 286·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from an order opening a judgment of non pros., entered under the rules of court for the failure of the plaintiff to file a statement of claim within one year of the return day of the writ. The judgment was entered without notice on the first day after the expiration of the year. The statute of limitations would be a bar to a new [516] action on the claim. The rules of court under which the judgment was entered, provide that “Judgments by default may be set aside or opened at the discretion of the court, when deemed necessary for the purpose of justice,” and that the court may enlarge the time to declare or plead on cause shown. There is therefore, no question of the construction of a rule of court, for there is nothing to construe, nor of the violation by a court of its rule for there was no violation. The matter was within the discretion of the court.

The order is affirmed at the cost of the appellant.

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

Williamsport National Bank v. Kreamer, 79 A. 713, 230 Pa. 515, 1911 Pa. LEXIS 643 (Pa. 1911).

79 A. 713 (Williamsport National Bank v. Kreamer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Manning v. Barnard Homes, Inc.
1 Pa. D. & C.2d 563 (Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, 1954)
Oppenheimer v. Shapiro
60 A.2d 337 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)
Horning v. David
8 A.2d 729 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1939)
McFadden v. Pennzoil Company
191 A. 584 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
Mazer v. Pittsburg Railways Co.
51 Pa. Super. 394 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1912)