Connell v. Webb

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Connell v. Webb, 175 Pa. 52 (Pa. 1896)
34 A. 346; 1896 Pa. LEXIS 1206
Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Sterrett

Connell v. Webb

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

We are not convinced that the learned court erred in hold*56ing tbe averments contained in the affidavit of defense were sufficient to carry the case to a jury.

Inasmuch as the case goes back for trial by jury, it is neither necessary nor desirable at this time to express any opinion as to the merits of the questions intended to be raised by the averments referred to.

Appeal dismissed at plaintiff’s costs, without prejudice, etc.

Reference

Full Case Name
Horatio P. Connell, late High Sheriff of the County of Philadelphia v. Charles J. Webb, Harry E. Lincoln and William B. Toland, trading as Charles J. Webb & Company
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Sheriff's sales — Failure to comply with purchase — Affidavit of- defense. In an action by a sheriff against a purchaser at a sheriff’s sale to recover the difference in price between a first and second sale, an affidavit of defense is sufficient which avers that the defendants were the purchasers at the first sale; that without any notice or demand upon them to eomply with the terms of the first sale, the sheriff returned the writ of the firs' sale and issued an alias writ; that at the second sale the property was bid in for two mechanics’ lien claimants who failed to comply with the terms of sale; that the sheriff accepted the defendants’ second bid at said second sale, and finally settled with the defendants; that the suit is brought at the request and for the sole use of said two claimants whose liens would not have been reached by the original sale; that defendants themselves would have been entitled to all the money of the first sale in excess of the amount of the second sale.