Kline v. Fitzgerald Bros.

Citations

• 267 Pa. 468
• 110 A. 348
• 1920 Pa. LEXIS 892

Syllabus

<p>Judgment — Opening judgment — Equity—Answer on information and belief — Burden of proof — Evidence—Clear, precise and indubitable — Transferee as use-plaintiff — Appeal—Review.</p> <p>1. An answer on information and belief to a petition to open judgment, while it need not be overcome by the evidence of two witnesses, or what is equivalent thereto, yet stands as a denial, and places the burden of proof on defendants, who seek to strike down their own solemn written obligation, and to do so must present evidence that is clear, precise and indubitable.</p> <p>2. Where an application is made to open a judgment, the relief demanded is in equity, and the applicant or complainant must make out a case which would justify a chancellor in entering the decree.</p> <p>3. In such a case the defendant being an interested witness, his sole uncorroborated testimony is not sufficient to overcome his written promise to pay.</p> <p>4. Where judgment notes are transferred to a use-plaintiff after maturity, such use-plaintiff stands in the same position as the payee would if no transfer had been made.</p> <p>5. Where an appeal from an order opening a judgment turns upon legal questions and deductions from facts, and therefore comes before the appellate court for review upon the merits rather than to see that the chancellor has properly exercised his discretion, and the application to open is based upon the uncorroborated testimony of the defendant, and such testimony is not clear, precise and indubitable, and in several material respects throws doubt upon the averments of his petition, the order opening the judgment will be reversed.</p> <p>6. If such a case should go to trial on the same evidence, it would be the duty of the court to direct a verdict for the plaintiff,</p>