175 Pa. 52
Decided April 6, 1896
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1896-04-06
Appeal, No. 42, Jan. T., 1896, by-plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1894, No. 800, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Assumpsit to recover the difference between defendants’ bids at a first and second sheriff’s sale. Before Arnold, J. Defendants filed the following affidavit of defense.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1904
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1896-04-06
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1We are not convinced that the learned court erred in hold*56ing tbe averments contained in the affidavit of defense were sufficient to carry the case to a jury.
¶2Inasmuch as the case goes back for trial by jury, it is neither necessary nor desirable at this time to express any opinion as to the merits of the questions intended to be raised by the averments referred to.
¶3Appeal dismissed at plaintiff’s costs, without prejudice, etc.