Morrison v. Nevin

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Morrison v. Nevin, 130 Pa. 344 (Pa. 1889)
18 A. 636; 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1191
Collum, Green, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams

Morrison v. Nevin

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

We need not discuss the rules of the court below in regard to entering judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of de*348fence. As that court is more familiar with its own rules, and the practice under them, than we can possibly be, we would not be disposed to reverse for the reasons specified in the second and fourth assignments, unless it had been clearly made to appear that said rules had been violated. This has not been done. Upon the merits, we regard the affidavit of defence as insufficient. The indebtedness to plaintiff is not denied, and the most that the affidavit amounts to is an accord without satisfaction.

' Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
J. S. MORRISON v. H. O. NEVIN
Cited By
4 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. The court below being more familiar with its own rules and its practice under them, a specification assigning error in the violation of one of its rules, will not be considered when it is not clearly made to appear that there was such violation. 2. An affidavit of defence averring that the indebtedness claimed had been paid by notes given, and that afterward the plaintiffs had agreed to take the amount claimed, in trade, and not to bring suit therefor, is insufficient to prevent summary judgment.