Mullet v. Hensel

Citations

• 7 Pa. Super. 524
• 1898 Pa. Super. LEXIS 335

Syllabus

<p>Appeals — Judgment—Application to open — Discretion of court — Quality and quantity of essential testimony.</p> <p>An application to open a judgment is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and on appeal from a refusal to open, the question to be decided is, whether that discretion has been properly exercised.</p> <p>AVhere the defense is that there was a contemporaneous parol agreement varying the terms of the writing upon which judgment was entered, it is incumbent on the defendant to sustain his allegation by testimony of the kind and quantity which would be sufficient to move a chancellor to reform the instrument.</p>