Pennsylvania County Court Reports, Containing Cases Decided in the Courts of the Several Counties of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Volume 25) (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1902. Excerpt: ... Rorabaugh v. Schrubb. that no defence to the bill existed. He had a right to rely on the presumption that the payee in whose possession it was continued to be its owner. From the foregoing the conclusion follows that the defendant's motion for judgment must be granted and the rule for new trial refused. Decree will be made accordingly. DECREE. Now, this 21st day of January, 1901, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the rule for judgment non obstante veredicto be and is hereby made absolute, and judgment is directed to be entered in favor of the defendant. From Oscar Mitchell, Esq., Clearfield, Pa. Rudolph, v. Sturgis. Judgment--Prior judgment--Discontinuance--Justice of the peace. There can be but one final judgment for the same cause of action; and where a judgment has already been obtained in a prior action by the plaintiff against the defendant for the identical demand, contract or obligation, the same is merged by the superiority of the record security acquired by the judgment, and the creditor can no longer prosecute suit upon the original demand. A plaintiff may withdraw or discontinue his suit at any time before judgment, or before the justice pronounces upon it; but after judgment unappealed from, if he discontinues, it is satisfaction of the demand. Plea in abatement. C. P. Montgomery Co. March T., 1900, No. 96. Larzelere, Gibson & Fox, for plaintiff. Evans, Holland & Dettra, for defendant. Weand, J., Nov. 23, 1900.--To this action the defendant has filed a plea in abatement that "about the beginning of December, 1899, a prior action of attachment for the same debt for which the present action is brought, was brought by said plaintiff against deponent (defendant) before Justice of the Peace M. A. Francis, of Lower Merion township, and that t...

R1,021

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles10210
Mobicred@R96pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1902. Excerpt: ... Rorabaugh v. Schrubb. that no defence to the bill existed. He had a right to rely on the presumption that the payee in whose possession it was continued to be its owner. From the foregoing the conclusion follows that the defendant's motion for judgment must be granted and the rule for new trial refused. Decree will be made accordingly. DECREE. Now, this 21st day of January, 1901, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the rule for judgment non obstante veredicto be and is hereby made absolute, and judgment is directed to be entered in favor of the defendant. From Oscar Mitchell, Esq., Clearfield, Pa. Rudolph, v. Sturgis. Judgment--Prior judgment--Discontinuance--Justice of the peace. There can be but one final judgment for the same cause of action; and where a judgment has already been obtained in a prior action by the plaintiff against the defendant for the identical demand, contract or obligation, the same is merged by the superiority of the record security acquired by the judgment, and the creditor can no longer prosecute suit upon the original demand. A plaintiff may withdraw or discontinue his suit at any time before judgment, or before the justice pronounces upon it; but after judgment unappealed from, if he discontinues, it is satisfaction of the demand. Plea in abatement. C. P. Montgomery Co. March T., 1900, No. 96. Larzelere, Gibson & Fox, for plaintiff. Evans, Holland & Dettra, for defendant. Weand, J., Nov. 23, 1900.--To this action the defendant has filed a plea in abatement that "about the beginning of December, 1899, a prior action of attachment for the same debt for which the present action is brought, was brought by said plaintiff against deponent (defendant) before Justice of the Peace M. A. Francis, of Lower Merion township, and that t...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

February 2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

February 2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 17mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

312

ISBN-13

978-1-235-69123-2

Barcode

9781235691232

Categories

LSN

1-235-69123-3



Trending On Loot