Bartoe v. Guckert
Citations
- 158 Pa. 124
- 27 A. 845
- 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1553
Syllabus
<p>Affidavit of defence — Judgment—Practice, C. P.</p> <p>Where plaintiff is not entitled to judgment for want of an affidavit of Jefence, he is not entitled to judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence.</p> <p>Affidavit of defence — Penalties—Plugging oil well — Act of June 10, 1881.</p> <p>In an action to recover the penalty of $200 for not properly plugging an abandoned oil well, in violation of the act of June 10, 1881, P. L. 110, § 2, defendant is not required to file an affidavit of defence. If he does so, judgment cannot be taimen against him for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- amendment to the Act could not be retroactively applied to increase the claimant’s benefits, since the claimant’s right to benefits, and the employer’s obligation to pay those benefits, were fixed by the law in force at the time of the injury
- the obligations of employers to pay benefits to dependents of a deceased employee are fixed by the statute in force at the time of the deceased's work-related injury and are therefore not subject to subsequent substantive change in the law despite changes to the status of the dependents
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dean, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Thompson, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.