Kæstner v. Ehinger

Citations

• 240 Pa. 593
• 88 A. 7
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 721

Syllabus

<p>Judgments — Opening judgment — Evidence—Judicial discretion —Abuse.</p> <p>Upon a rule to open a judgment entered upon a judgment note, the petition averred that defendant maker had made a parol agreement with payee, his uncle, to the effect that if defendant would buy a certain house and allow payee to live with him, payee would advance defendant $3,000.00 to assist in the purchase of the house, and would leave his property to defendant; that the money was advanced, the house acquired, and that a written agreement was entered into by the terms of which defendant agreed to furnish a comfortable home to payee during his life, and provide him a decent burial and that the note was given merely as collateral security for the performance of the contract. The agreement did not contain any provision that the $3,000.00 was not to be repaid nor did it contain any agreement by payee to remain in the home of defendant during his life. An answer was filed, denying all the material allegations of the petition, and denying that there was ever any agreement that the judgment note should be given merely as security, but that it was what it purported to be on its face. The answer further averred that defendant had driven payee from his home, and refused to permit him to live with him longer. The averments of the petition were supported only by the testimony of one competent witness, whose testimony was vague and uncertain and did not contain any statement indicating that a gift of the money had been made from the payee to defendant. Held, on these facts it was an abuse of discretion for the court to open the judgment.</p>