Kulp v. Bowen

Citations

• 122 Pa. 78
• 15 A. 717
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 594

Syllabus

<p>1. The return of service of a writ of ejectment raises but a prima facie legal presumption that the defendants are in the possession of the lands described in the writ, and does not conclusively estop the plaintiff from showing the contrary in another action.</p> <p>2. The plaintiffs, in an- ejectment for a particular tract, filed a bond and had a writ of estrepement served upon the defendants, who, though cutting on another tract the lines of which they knew, and not upon that described’in the writ, thereupon ceased operations. The plaintiffs afterwards suffered a nonsuit in the ejectment, when the defendants brought suit upon the estrepement bond: Held, that they were not entitled to recover.</p>