Case ID: pa_306/html/0194-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Windisch, Appellant, v. First Camden Nat. Bank & Trust Co.
    Argued January 7,1932.
    Before Frazer, C. J., Simpson, Kephart, Schaefer, Maxey and Drew, JJ.
    
      February 3, 1932:
    
      H. James Sautter, with him Raymond J. Sicer, for appellant.
    
      Richard Kingsbury Stevens, of Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Denby, for appellee.
   Per Curiam,

We are of opinion that this is not a ease “clear and free from doubt,” this being so, the order discharging the rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense is affirmed: Colonial Securities Co. v. Levy et al. (No. 2), 302 Pa. 329, 331; Sharples v. Northampton Trans. Co., 303 Pa. 211, 212; Chelten Avenue Building Corp. v. Mayer, 306 Pa. 225; Penna. Co. for Insurances, etc., v. Bergson, 307 Pa. 44.

The order of the court below is affirmed.