Mulhearn v. Roach

Citations

• 24 Pa. Super. 483
• 1904 Pa. Super. LEXIS 217

Syllabus

<p>Practice, C. P. — Pleading—Plea of non est factum.</p> <p>On an issue framed after a judgment has been opened, where it is agreed that the contract shall stand for a declaration, and that the defendant shall plead non assumpsit, and the defendant so pleads, it is not error for the court at the trial to refuse to permit to be filed the additional plea of non est factum.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Evidence—Contract.</p> <p>Where on an issue framed after a judgment has been opened, it appeared that the paper containing the contract and warrant of attorney on which the judgment was entered had been abstracted from the records, it is not error to admit in evidence the entries in the continuance docket, as secondary evidence of the contract; and even if such evidence were questionable j it became unimportant and harmless where the defendant subsequently gave in evidence the contract and relied upon it for a defense.</p> <p>Judgment — Judgment note — Breach of condition.</p> <p>Where a warrant to confess judgment authorizes any attorney to appear and confess judgment for an amount named, the defendant has no standing to be first heard before entry of judgment.</p>