Cake v. Cake

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Cake v. Cake, 162 Pa. 584 (Pa. 1894)
29 A. 797; 1894 Pa. LEXIS 1024
Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Sterrett

Cake v. Cake

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from the decree discharging the rule to show cause why the judgment should not be opened and the defendant let in to a defence. Our examination of the record has led us to the conclusion that there is nothing in either of the specifications of error that would justify a reversal. The learned president of the common pleas rightly held that Minnie E. Cake, the payee in the note and original plaintiff in the judgment, being dead, the defendant Joseph W. Cake is not a competent witness, and without his testimony there is not sufficient evidence to justify the court in making the rule to show cause etc. absolute. There is nothing in the case that requires discussion.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellant.

Reference

Full Case Name
J. Adam Cake, Exr. v. Jos. W. Cake
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Evidence — Competency of witness — Act of June 11, 1891. Where a plaintiff in a judgment is dead, and her title to the judgment has passed to her husband, the defendant is incompetent to testify in a proceeding to open a judgment as to matters occurring during the lifetime of the plaintiff. Under the act of June 11, 1891, P. L. 287, the living witness whose testimony is to make competent the surviving or remaining party to the record must be called in the interest of, and by the party representing the right of the deceased. The calling of such a witness by the adversary was not within the contemplation of the act.