M. Darragh & Co. v. Bigger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
M. Darragh & Co. v. Bigger, 172 Pa. 89 (Pa. 1895)
33 A. 273; 1895 Pa. LEXIS 735
Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett, Williams
M. Darragh & Co. v. Bigger
Opinion of the Court
The sole complaint is “that the court erred in opening the judgment as to P. H. Stevenson, deceased, and permitting his personal representatives to make defense to the judgment.” An examination of the testimony that was introduced in support of the petition to open the judgment etc. has satisfied us that it was quite sufficient to justify the action complained of. Discussion of the testimony, as the case now stands, is neither
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellants.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- M. Darragh & Co. v. John Bigger and P. H. Stevenson, whose death is suggested, and Elizabeth Stevenson, and Charles L. Stevenson, Administrator
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Judgment— Opening j udgment — Evidence. A judgment against a decedent will be opened where the evidence shows that it was entered twenty-six’years before his death, in a county where he did not live, and where he -had no real estate; that during the whole of this period he had valuable real estate in the county where he did live, and that he was always able to pay the judgment; and when twenty witnesses have testified that in their opinion the signature appended to the note upon which judgment was entered was not that of decedent, against five who testify to the genuineness of the signature in their opinion.