From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wade v. Thornton

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
May 18, 1925
129 A. 637 (Pa. 1925)

Opinion

April 24, 1925.

May 18, 1925.

Appeals — Review — Judgment — Opening judgment — Discretion of court — Abuse.

The appellate court will not reverse an order making absolute a rule to open a judgment, where it is convinced on examination of the record that the court below did not abuse its discretion in so doing.

Appeal, No. 284, Jan. T., 1925, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1924, No. 9862, making absolute rule to open judgment in case of John A. Wade v. Thomas Thornton.

Before MOSCHZISKER, C. J., FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART, SADLER and SCHAFFER, JJ. Affirmed.

Rule to open judgment. Before FERGUSON, J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Rule absolute. Plaintiff appealed.

Error assigned was, inter alia, order, quoting record.

C. W. Van Artsdalen, for appellant.

William T. Connor, with him John R. K. Scott, for appellee.


Argued April 24, 1925.


The court below made absolute a rule to open a judgment for $20,616.05, entered August 2, 1924, on three judgment notes dated April 4, 1905, aggregating a face value of $11,500; that is to say, judgment was entered, for principal and interest, more than nineteen years after the date of the notes.

We shall not at this time indicate any view as to the merits of the case or as to the points of law involved; it is sufficient to say that an examination of the record has not convinced us the court below abused its discretion in entering the order assigned for error.

The order is affirmed.


Summaries of

Wade v. Thornton

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
May 18, 1925
129 A. 637 (Pa. 1925)
Case details for

Wade v. Thornton

Case Details

Full title:Wade, Appellant, v. Thornton

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: May 18, 1925

Citations

129 A. 637 (Pa. 1925)
129 A. 637

Citing Cases

Michaels v. Moritz

"An application to open a judgment entered upon a warrant of attorney is an equitable proceeding governed by…

McCarty et al. v. Emerick

When there is more than this, and it comes to the question of the weight of the evidence, it is for him to…