Southern Steamship Co. v. Hull

Citations

• 46 Pa. Super. 299
• 1911 Pa. Super. LEXIS 271

Syllabus

<p>Practice, C. P. — Pleading—Statement of claim — Affidavit of defense.</p> <p>1. An affidavit of defense is not required of the defendant where the action sounds in tort, or where it arises on an implied contract growing out of a duty resting upon the defendant.</p> <p>2. In an action by a steamship company against a teamster employed by the plaintiff to transport goods an affidavit of defense is not required where the statement of claim avers that certain goods were delivered to the defendant for transportation, and that the latter had never delivered the goods and had never paid nor caused to be paid the balance of the same, and that by reason of such neglect, and of the loss or conversion of the goods by the defendant the latter became liable to the plaintiff for the same for which the suit was brought.</p> <p>3. In such a case where the statement further averred that it was the custom of the defendant to present weekly or monthly statements of his drayage for the purpose of receiving compensation therefor, but that he had not included the goods in question in any such statement, an affidavit of defense is sufficient which denies any custom of the kind alleged, and avers that the receipts which have been given to the defendant for the goods which he had delivered had all been surrendered to the plaintiff when the defendant received his pay.</p> <p>4. The Act of April 18, 1874, P. L. 64, authorizing a writ of error where judgment is refused for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, is only intended to reach clear cases of error in law and thus prevent the delay of a trial.</p>