Bell v. Throop

Citations

• 140 Pa. 641
• 21 A. 408
• 1891 Pa. LEXIS 885

Syllabus

<p>(a) On April 10, 1876, Fisher obtained a judgment against Tobias, then in possession of real estate as a purchaser from Throop under articles of agreement. On April 17th, judgment in ejectment for unpaid purchase money was confessed to Throop, and on May 2d, possession given him on habere facias:</p> <p>1. In ejectment by a purchaser at a subsequent sheriff’s sale on the Fisher judgment, the confession of the judgment in ejectment to Throop was not evidence of fraud on the creditors of Tobias, in the absence of evidence that Throop had knowledge of the intention of Tobias to defraud.</p> <p>2. The testimony of the wife of Tobias, offered to corroborate that of her husband, to the effect that the judgment in ejectment was confessed because his creditors were crowding him, was inadmissible, being offered to show the husband’s turpitude, for which she was incompetent,</p> <p>3. A petition of Tobias for an order to open the Fisher judgment and to stay the writ issued thereon, was irrelevant, as the mere acts and declarations of Tobias, after the transaction, were insufficient to connect Throop with the alleged fraud upon the creditors of Tobias.</p>