Case ID: pa_270/html/0226-01.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

Self et al., Appellants, v. Pennsylvania Steel Co.
    
      Appeals—Practice, G. P.—Affidavit of defense—Refusal of judgment.
    
    Where on an appeal from the refusal to enter judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, the appellate court is not convinced of error, it will affirm the order of the lower court without expressing any view on the issues involved. .
    Argued March 25, 1921.
    Appeal, No. 408, Jan. T., 1921, by plaintiffs, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1920, No. 1596, discharging rule for judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of William B. Self and Sydney B. Self, trading as William B. Self & Co., v. Pennsylvania Steel Export Co.
    Before \Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Simpson, Sadler and Schapper, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Assumpsit for commissions on sale of steel plates. Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
    The court, McMichabl, J., made an order discharging the rule, without filing an opinion. Plaintiffs appealed.
    
      Error assigned was above order, quoting it.
    
      Joseph J. Brown, with him Henry P. Brown, for appellant.
    
      Claude C. Smith, with him Duane, Morris & Heckscher, for appellee.
    April 11, 1921:
   Per Curiam,

This is an appeal from the refusal to enter judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Notwithstanding the able and enlightening argument of counsel for appellants, we are not convinced of error; following the usual course under such circumstances, we express no view on the issues involved.

The order of the court below is affirmed.