Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

54 Pa. Super. 281

Johnson v. Putnam

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 16, 1913

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1913-07-16

Appeal, No. 107, April T., 1913, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Somerset Co., May T., 1912, No. 381, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of V. M. Johnson v. David Putnam. Assumpsit for the price of a piano. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1993

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1913-07-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam,

¶1This case came into the common pleas by appeal by the defendant from the judgment of a justice of the peace. No statement of claim was filed by the plaintiff in the common pleas, and all that the transcript of the justice shows as to the nature of the action, or as to the cause of action, is that it was a. civil suit to recover $245. Accepting as verity the averments of the affidavit of defense as to the nature of the claim and the facts under which it arose, it is quite clear that the plaintiff was not entitled to summary judgment against this defendant. This is well shown by the opinion of the learned judge of the common pleas, and we need add nothing thereto.

¶2The appeal is dismissed at the cost of the appellant, without prejudice, etc.

/54/pasuper/281 · .json · Public domain